Case Summary (A.C. No. 5808)
Allegations Against the Respondent
On December 22, 1997, Espiritu entrusted Ulep with P50,000 as part of a settlement for Civil Case No. 1028. Additionally, Ulep failed to deliver a balance of P30,000 plus interest related to a deed of absolute sale. Espiritu attempted to seek assistance from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) after Ulep allegedly avoided communication and did not respond to demands for repayment.
Proceedings Initiated by the IBP
Due to the respondent's absence at an initial meeting aimed at amicably settling the complaint, the IBP formally endorsed Espiritu’s verified letter-complaint for disciplinary action. Ulep filed a counter-affidavit, asserting that there was no estafa and that the funds were contingent upon the delivery of the owner's copy of the Title, which had not been provided. His affidavit included descriptions of payments made and alleged communications with Espiritu.
Hearings and Evidence Presented
A series of scheduled hearings resulted in Ulep's failure to appear multiple times. This indicated an evasive attitude on his part towards resolving the misconduct complaint. Despite the notifications and opportunities for Ulep to present a defense, he repeatedly requested postponements and eventually failed to provide an adequate answer to the allegations. The IBP Commission decided to proceed with the hearing in Ulep's absence, resulting in Espiritu’s evidence being admitted ex-parte.
Findings and Recommendations by the IBP
After reviewing the evidence, the IBP Investigating Commissioner concluded that Ulep had misappropriated the P50,000 and recommended a six-month suspension from practicing law for violating Canon 16 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The IBP Board of Governors adopted these findings, determining that Ulep’s actions constituted serious misconduct that undermined client trust.
Conclusion a
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 5808)
Background of the Case
- Complainant Oscar M. Espiritu filed a letter complaint against Atty. Jaime C. Ulep to the president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), Nueva Ecija Chapter.
- The complaint stemmed from allegations that Atty. Ulep had been avoiding Espiritu for over a year.
- The main issues raised included:
- Failure to turn over P50,000 to Espiritu's client, Mr. Ricardo Maon, as settlement for Civil Case No. 1028.
- Non-payment of P30,000 plus interest and expenses due to Espiritu for a deed of absolute sale executed on December 22, 1997.
Proceedings Before the IBP
- On April 5, 1999, the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD) invited Atty. Ulep for a meeting to discuss potential amicable settlement, which he did not attend.
- The IBP Nueva Ecija Chapter formally endorsed Espiritu's complaint on April 19, 1999.
- An order dated May 28, 1999, required Atty. Ulep to file an answer to the complaint, which he complied with via a counter-affidavit.
Atty. Ulep’s Counter-Affidavit
- In his counter-affidavit, Ulep argued that there were no elements of estafa in the case.
- He claimed:
- Espiritu had admitted that the owner's copy of the title was lost and agreed to hold the P50,000 in trust until the title was provided.
- He had disbursed P25,000 of the P50,000 to Espiritu’s niece to facil