JUANITA MANAOIS, ADM. CASE No. 5364
Complainant,
Present:
QUISUMBING,
J.,
Chairperson,
- versus -
CARPIO
MORALES,
TINGA,
VELASCO, JR., and
BRION, JJ.
ATTY. VICTOR V. DECIEMBRE,
Respondent.
Promulgated:
x----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
Tinga,
J.:
Before
this Court is an administrative complaint for disbarment filed by Juanita Manaois (complainant) against Atty. Victor V. Deciembre (respondent) for willful and deliberate
falsification and conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar.
Complainant
gave the following account of the facts that spawned the present administrative
Complaint.[1]
Complainant
is a government employee working as a mail sorter at the Manila Central Post
Office. Sometime in 1998, she applied for a loan of P20,000 from Rodella Loans, Inc.,
through respondent. As security for the loan, respondent required her to issue and
deliver to him blank checks that he would fill out according to their agreed monthly
installments. Notwithstanding the full payment of the loan, respondent
allegedly failed to return the remaining blank checks. Respondent told complainant
that the loan had not yet been paid and that the payments had been credited to
the interest on the loan. Respondent threatened complainant with a lawsuit in
the event of nonpayment. Respondent allegedly filled out the blank checks with
different amounts and made it appear that complainant had them exchanged them for
cash in the total amount of
P287,500.00 for use in her business venture. Using these
checks as basis, respondent filed several cases against complainant for estafa and for violation of Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22 before the City Prosecutor’s Office of Quezon City and
Complainant
contended that no man of respondent’s stature would be too foolish to extend a P287,500.00 loan to a mere mail sorter earning barely P6,000.00 a month on the bare assurance that her
postdated checks would be encashed on their due dates.[3]
In
his Comment[4]
dated
In
a Resolution[5]
dated
Commissioner
Wilfredo E.J.E. Reyes conducted hearings on the
matter. In his Report and Recommendation[6] dated
The
Court sustains the resolution of the IBP Board of Governors except as to the
recommended penalty.
Canon
1, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides:
CANON 1 – A LAWYER SHALL
UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW
AND LEGAL PROCESSES.
Rule 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
The
Code of Professional Responsibility likewise mandates that “a lawyer shall at
all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession.”[7] To
this end, nothing should be done by any member of the legal fraternity which
might tend to lessen in any degree the confidence of the public in the
fidelity, honesty and integrity of the profession.[8]
Evidently,
respondent failed to comply with the foregoing canons. As shown by the records
and as found by the Commissioner, complainant had supplied respondent with blank
personal checks as security for the P20,000 loan she had contracted and which respondent subsequently deceitfully filled
out with various amounts they had not agreed upon and with full knowledge that
the loan had already been paid. After the filled-out checks had been dishonored
upon presentment, respondent even imprudently filed multiple lawsuits against
complainant. Verily, respondent is guilty of serious dishonesty and
professional misconduct. He committed an act indicative of moral depravity not
expected from and highly unbecoming of a member of the Bar.[9] The
fact that the conduct pertained to respondent’s private dealings with
complainant is of no moment. A lawyer may be suspended or disbarred for any
misconduct, even if it pertains to his private activities, as long as it shows him
to be wanting in moral character, honesty, probity or good demeanor. Possession
of good moral character is not only a good condition precedent to the practice
of law, but also a continuing qualification for all members of the Bar.[10]
For
the record, respondent has already been indefinitely suspended from the
practice of law in A.C. No. 5365 entitled Olbes
v. Deciembre,[11]
a case involving an offense and a set of facts similar to the case
at bar. In the said case, the Court notes that complainants therein averred
that “many of their officemates—among them, Juanita Manaois,
Honorata Acosta and Eugenia Mendoza—had suffered the
same fate in their dealings with respondent (Deciembre).”[12]
This demonstrates respondent’s propensity to employ deceit and
misrepresentation. As such, following our ruling in Olbes, the Court hereby imposes the same penalty upon respondent in the
present case.
WHEREFORE,
Atty. Victor V. Deciembre is found guilty of gross
misconduct and violation of Rules 1.01 and 7.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility. He is SUSPENDED indefinitely from the practice of law.
Let copies of this Resolution be furnished all courts, as well as the Office of the Bar
Confidant which is directed to append a copy hereof to respondent’s personal
record. Let another copy be furnished the National Office of the
Integrated Bar of the
SO ORDERED.
DANTE O. TINGA Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING
Associate Justice
Chairperson
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR.
Associate Justice
Associate Justice
ARTURO D. BRION
Associate Justice