A.C. No. 6368 - Bengco vs. Bernardo

Complainant Emilio Grande was the private offended party in eight criminal cases (Criminal Cases Nos. 96-1346 to 96-1353) filed with the Regional Trial Court of Marikina City, Branch 273 for Estafa and for Violations of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22.
The criminal cases were titled “People of the Philippines, Plaintiff versus Sergio Natividad, Accused,” involving civil liabilities arising from the conduct of respondent’s client.

Respondent Atty. Evangeline de Silva, counsel for the accused, tendered to complainant a check (No. 0023638) amounting to P144,768.00 as settlement for the civil aspect of the case.
Complainant initially resisted the settlement; however, upon respondent’s assurance that the check would be honored (i.e., drawn against an account sufficiently funded), complainant was prevailed upon to accept the check.
As a consequence, complainant desisted from further participating as a complaining witness, eventually leading to the dismissal of the criminal cases and the release of the accused, Sergio Natividad.

Upon deposit, the check was returned unpaid by the Philippine National Bank with the remark “Account Closed.”
On June 19, 1997, the complainant sent a letter demanding that respondent cover the face value of the check.
Respondent ignored the demand, which further motivated the complainant to institute a criminal complaint for Estafa and Violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 (docketed as I.S. No. 97-1036).

On November 10, 1997, an administrative complaint for disbarment was filed against respondent for deceit and violation of the Lawyer’s Oath.
A Resolution dated February 2, 1998, required respondent to respond within ten (10) days but was returned unserved with the notation “Moved.”
Later, on June 20, 2001, another resolution was served at the latest known address (274 M.H. Del Pilar Street, Pasig City) and was likewise returned unserved with “Refused.”

Following the failed service of administrative notices, the case was referred to the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) for investigation, report, and recommendation.
In a Report dated December 6, 2001, Investigating Commissioner Florimond C. Rous found respondent guilty of deceit, gross misconduct, and violation of the Lawyer’s Oath.
The Commission recommended a suspension of respondent from the practice of law for two (2) years.

On October 19, 2002, the IBP Board of Governors passed Resolution No. XV-2002-554 adopting the recommendation of a two-year suspension.
The disciplinary proceedings underscored that respondent’s act of issuing a bouncing check—thereby deceiving the complainant—constituted a serious breach of trust and professional misconduct.

Whether respondent Atty. Evangeline de Silva deceived complainant by issuing a check tendered as a settlement that later bounced due to being drawn on a closed account.
Whether the act of issuing a bouncing check in settlement negotiations constitutes deceit and a violation of the Lawyer’s Oath, thereby amounting to gross misconduct.
Whether respondent’s persistent failure to accept service of administrative resolutions further evidences a willful defiance of lawful orders and tarnishes the reputation required of a member of the legal profession.