A.C. No. 5987 - Yamon-Leach vs. Astorga

Complainant: Vidaylin Yamon-Leach, a former client and distant relative of respondent.
Respondent: Atty. Arturo B. Astorga, prominent practitioner, then a Leyte Provincial Board Member; charged with deceit, malpractice, grossly immoral conduct, and gross violations of his Lawyer’s Oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) in a disbarment complaint (A.C. No. 5987, Decision dated August 28, 2019, En Banc).

September 2001: Respondent urged complainant to buy a “beach-front” property of Villaflora Un in Baybay, Leyte for P1.4M, payable in installments; he volunteered to handle the transaction and title transfer.
Before complainant left for the U.S., respondent collected P110,000 allegedly to reserve the property; no receipt issued due to complainant’s trust in respondent as family lawyer.
While in Las Vegas, complainant remitted P1,300,215 (PNB O.R. No. LV-067776; Sept. 19, 2001) to respondent to cover the balance and costs; funds went into respondent’s PNB Baybay account (No. 451-504-6718).
December 2001: Respondent told complainant he had paid the seller and was processing title transfer; he later presented an undated “Deed of Absolute Sale of Portions of Registered Land” and asked complainant to sign “Conforme.”
Irregularities in the deed: sellers named were “Ariston Chaperon and Ursula Gumba” (not Villaflora Un); no boundaries/technical description; no tax declaration numbers; deed undated.
Respondent assured corrections and demanded further funds for attorney’s fees, taxes, and processing; he issued a “Tickler” and “Statement of Account” itemizing supposed expenses and fees.
Complainant remitted additional sums per respondent’s demands: P204,000 (US$4,000; O.R. No. LV-079933; Jan. 9, 2002) and P205,436 (US$4,060; O.R. No. LV-080645; Jan. 23, 2002), all documented by PNB remittance certifications to respondent’s account.

Verification by complainant’s brother with Villaflora Un revealed she never received any money from respondent; the land in the deed was neither Ms. Un’s nor “beach-front.”
The named sellers’ signatures were forgeries: Ariston Chaperon died June 14, 1994; Ursula Gumba died in 1995; both were already deceased eight years before the purported execution; the deed falsely appeared acknowledged before respondent as notary.
When confronted, respondent apologized, admitted using the money, and made repeated unfulfilled promises to reimburse (end of May 2002; last week of June; mid-July; last week of September 2002).
October 2002: At a meeting in Abuyog, Leyte, respondent again apologized (“That is my fault… why I did it…”) and acknowledged receipt totalling P1,819,651; he presented an “Agreement” to pay in installments and a “Deed of Real Estate Mortgage” over his purported Veterans Village, QC lots; complainant refused to sign.
Respondent promised P1,000,000 initial payment on Nov. 4, 2002 (extended to Nov. 8); on Nov. 7, 2002 he wrote that he could not pay, citing excuses; no restitution was made.

April 2, 2003: Supreme Court required respondent to comment within 10 days; he failed. Complainant repeatedly moved to consider comment waived and to submit for resolution (Nov. 9, 2005; July 29, 2009; Oct. 17, 2011; Nov. 19, 2012).
Feb. 8, 2006: Show-cause and order to file comment; tracer showed receipt on April 5, 2006; still no compliance.
July 22, 2009: Court fined respondent P1,000 and reiterated directive to comment; he later paid the fine on July 14, 2011 and sought a 10-day extension (granted Aug. 24, 2011) but again did not file any comment.
Feb. 29, 2012: Court increased fine to P2,000 and again ordered him to comment; he still failed to comply.
As of Aug. 13, 2019: No comment filed; Court deemed his right to comment waived and resolved the case on complainant’s evidence.
A 2019 resolution mailed to respondent was returned “RTS - No One to Receive - Addressee is sick due to his old age”; the Court did not credit this claim absent competent proof, noting respondent’s pattern of evasion.

Nuñez, et al. v. Astorga (2005): Fined for conduct unbecoming a member of the Bar (use of offensive language in pleadings).
Saladaga v. Astorga (2014; consolidated cases): Found guilty of fraudulent and deceptive misrepresentation, bad faith, and dishonesty in a pacto de retro transaction involving a foreclosed property; suspended for two years with a stern warning; Court records did not show he ever served this suspension.
Pattern noted: manipulation, misrepresentation, defiance of Court and IBP directives, and refusal to receive Court processes.

Whether respondent committed deceit, gross misconduct, malpractice, grossly immoral conduct, and violations of the Lawyer’s Oath and the CPR by soliciting, misappropriating, and failing to account for client funds, fabricating or notarizing a deed involving deceased supposed sellers, and making false representations to the complainant.

Whether respondent’s repeated failure and refusal to comply with Supreme Court directives to file comment constitutes willful disobedience, gross misconduct, and violations of Canon 12 and Rules 12.03 and 12.04 of the CPR.

Considering the gravity of the infractions, pattern of prior misconduct, and disregard of Court processes, whether disbarment is the appropriate penalty.