A.C. No. 13550 - Ariel Conducto Castillo vs. Atty. Restituto S. Mendoza

The complaint for disbarment was filed by Ariel Conducto Castillo against Atty. Restituto S. Mendoza on November 23, 2016.
The allegations include misrepresentation and deceit, which are violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).

The complainant met the respondent in August 2015 regarding the extrajudicial settlement of the estate of his deceased mother, Lagrimas Conducto Castillo.
Respondent represented complainant's sister, Annelyn Castillo-Wico, and requested the complainant and his siblings to sign an Extra Judicial Settlement of Estate with Waiver of Claims.
The complainant believed the respondent was acting in good faith and signed the document with his lawyer's assistance.

The complainant later discovered that Annelyn claimed ownership of all funds in their mother's account, which had been withdrawn before Lagrimas' death.
Upon verifying with Planters Bank, the complainant learned that the withdrawal was still being processed and subsequently sent a letter to the bank repudiating the EJS with Waiver.
Respondent filed a Petition to approve Lagrimas' last will, which the complainant opposed, claiming the will was revoked.

In May 2016, the complainant was informed that half of the funds had been withdrawn and distributed among siblings, with some allegedly pocketed by the respondent.
The respondent sent a collection letter regarding a property in Rizal without the complainant's knowledge, despite the complainant being the rightful owner.

The respondent claimed he acted as the lawyer for Annelyn and later for her brother, Arman, and facilitated discussions for amicable estate partition.
He denied deceiving the complainant and asserted that the EJS with Waiver was drafted at the bank's request to secure fund release.
The respondent contended that Annelyn withdrew her share legally and that he was entitled to collect receivables for Lagrimas' estate.

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Investigating Commissioner recommended a five-year suspension for the respondent, citing violations of the CPR.
The IC found insufficient evidence to support the complainant's claims of deceit regarding the EJS with Waiver but noted misrepresentations in the demand letter and unauthorized actions concerning the probate court.

The IBP Board of Governors modified the IC's recommendation, reducing the suspension to one year, deeming the original five-year penalty excessive.
The respondent filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, referencing a probate court order that deemed the petition withdrawn due to an amicable settlement.

...