A.C. No. 14203 - Lizada vs. Tecson

Mamerta C. Lizada, Benito Cuizon, Abelardo Cuizon, and Enrique Cuizon (Lizada et al.) filed an administrative complaint for disbarment against Atty. Demosthenes S. Tecson (Atty. Tecson).
Lizada et al. are the legal heirs of the late Spouses Leoncio Cuizon and Mamerta Seno, who owned several parcels of land in Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu.
The Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA) sought the expropriation of these parcels for the development of an export processing zone.

The Spouses Cuizon hired Atty. Tecson to represent them in the expropriation proceedings.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu fixed the just compensation at PHP 2,500 per square meter plus legal interest from January 28, 1981, until full payment.
Total just compensation with interest amounted to PHP 134,341,965.15, paid on December 23, 2015, by the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA).

The check for just compensation was received by Atty. Tecson.
He remitted only half of the due amount (PHP 13,434,196.51 each) to Lizada et al., totaling PHP 53,736,786.04.
The remaining half, amounting to PHP 67,170,982.57, was kept by Atty. Tecson.
Atty. Tecson claimed that half the amount was allotted to a "PR man" for facilitation of payment, allegedly with Lizada et al.’s consent, and also stated it was linked to support for former DOJ Secretary Leila De Lima’s senatorial bid.

He admitted being hired by the estate administrator as counsel and suggested engaging a PR man to expedite payment.
He acknowledged receiving the full compensation and distributing only half to Lizada et al.
The other half was used as attorney's fees (PHP 13,434,196.51) and fees for the PR man (PHP 67,170,982.57).
Claimed Lizada et al. agreed to these arrangements.

The IBP Investigating Commissioner found Atty. Tecson violated Canon III of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) regarding his duty of fidelity and accounting.
The IC noted his failure to timely file pleadings, showing disrespect for the law and tribunal.
Recommended disbarment and the return of PHP 67,170,982.57 with 6% interest.

Approved disbarment of Atty. Tecson.
Disapproved ordering him to return the disputed amount, stating Lizada et al. knew it was given to a third party.

Adopted the IBP Board's recommendation for disbarment.
Ordered Atty. Tecson to return the disputed PHP 67,170,982.57 with legal interest.
Ruled that applying the newer CPRA to this case is proper.
Held that duty of fidelity includes upholding the law, faithful accounting, and advising clients lawfully.
Found Atty. Tecson’s admission of bribery and failure to properly account as clear violations.
Emphasized that client consent does not excuse unlawful use or handling of client funds.
Stressed the presumption of misappropriation unless the lawyer proves proper use of funds.
Held that Atty. Tecson failed to provide proof of lawful application of the disputed amount.
Imposed disbarment, and required full return of misappropriated funds with 6% interest.
Directed immediate compliance and submission of proof of payment.

Whether Atty. Demosthenes S. Tecson violated the duty of fidelity and accounting under the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability by mishandling client funds.
Whether the conduct of Atty. Tecson constitutes gross misconduct and misappropriation of client funds sufficient for disbarment.
Whether the Court should order Atty. Tecson to return the disputed amount of PHP 67,170,982.57 with interest to the complainants.
Whether the client’s alleged consent to the use of funds for a "PR man" and political purposes absolves Atty. Tecson of liability.