A.C. No. 7619 - Babe Mae Villafuerte vs. Atty. Cezar R. Tajanlangit

On September 1, 2007, Babe Mae Villafuerte (complainant) filed a complaint against Atty. Cezar R. Tajanlangit (respondent), praying for his disbarment due to violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
The complaint alleged that in July 2006, Atty. Tajanlangit approached Villafuerte at her residence in San Fernando, Cebu, informing her she was entitled to death benefits connected to the death of her former live-in partner, Christopher Lee Hoaskins, a U.S. military service member.

Villafuerte, acquainted with Atty. Tajanlangit, accepted his assistance as her personal guide in Manila for the facilitation of the benefits transaction.
Upon receipt of the death benefits, Villafuerte withdrew PHP 1,200,000.00, which she gave to Atty. Tajanlangit as gratitude and payment for his services.
Atty. Tajanlangit subsequently asked to borrow an additional PHP 800,000.00, promising to repay within a week.

More than a year later, Atty. Tajanlangit did not repay the borrowed amount and withheld Villafuerte’s passport and other documents.
Villafuerte filed an administrative complaint praying for disbarment, payment of moral and exemplary damages, and repayment of the PHP 800,000.00.

In his February 2011 Comment, Atty. Tajanlangit admitted assisting Villafuerte and lending her money for expenses related to the claim. He asserted he had already returned Villafuerte's passport and documents.
Atty. Tajanlangit claimed financial difficulties led him to borrow PHP 300,000.00 from Villafuerte, intended for her house construction, with an agreement to repay in installments and with payments on behalf of Villafuerte to suppliers.
Villafuerte’s aunt, Leonila Villagracia, wrote a letter dated April 28, 2006, reminding Atty. Tajanlangit of the loan and requesting payment of construction payables.
Atty. Tajanlangit made payments totaling PHP 298,000.00 evidenced through deposit slips, checks, vouchers, and receipts.
By November 2007, he had nearly fully repaid the debt, with a balance of only PHP 1,000.00, and continued payments despite the complaint.

The Court referred the case to the IBP for investigation and recommendation.
Mandatory conference was held with only Atty. Tajanlangit attending.
Both parties were ordered to file position papers; only respondent complied, arguing the loan was fully paid and not a ground for disbarment.

On September 25, 2013, the IBP-CBD found a lawyer-client relationship existed and that borrowing money from a client is prohibited under Rule 16.04, Canon 16 of the CPR.
Despite this violation, since the debt was settled, the IBP-CBD recommended a reprimand.

On October 10, 2014, the IBP Board modified the penalty to a three-month suspension from the practice of law.
Atty. Tajanlangit filed a motion for reconsideration arguing absence of lawyer-client relationship and excessive penalty.
The motion was denied on April 29, 2016.

The Supreme Court agreed that a lawyer-client relationship existed.
It imposed a harsher penalty of six months’ suspension due to respondent’s prior admonition for another professional violation.
The Court emphasized that borrowing from clients is a serious abuse of trust irrespective of repayment.

Whether a lawyer-client relationship existed between Villafuerte and Atty. Tajanlangit.
Whether the borrowing of money by Atty. Tajanlangit from Villafuerte constituted a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability.
What penalty is appropriate for Atty. Tajanlangit’s violation of the prohibition against borrowing money from a client.