Title
Supreme Court
Mercullo vs. Ramon
Case
A.C. No. 11078
Decision Date
Jul 19, 2016
Atty. Ramon misled clients, failed to process property redemption, and withheld P350,000.00, violating professional ethics. Suspended for 5 years, ordered to repay with interest.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 11078)

Antecedents

Between 2002 and 2011, the National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation (NHMFC) sent multiple demand letters to Carmelita T. Vedanao regarding her unpaid mortgage obligations. To prevent foreclosure, Carmelita authorized her children, Verlita and Raymond, to inquire about the status of the mortgage. Upon investigation, they discovered that the total arrears amounted to P350,000 and that the matter was under Atty. Ramon's charge.

On June 20, 2012, a sheriff's notice indicated the property would be auctioned in July 2013. On August 30, 2013, after discussing their intentions to redeem the property, Verlita and Raymond met with Atty. Ramon, who instructed them on the redemption process and subsequently received P350,000 in cash, issuing acknowledgment receipts for both the redemption amount and additional expenses.

Key Interactions and Developments

Following the payment, Atty. Ramon provided a letter meant for the Clerk of Court, requesting assistance in redeeming the property. However, when the complainants returned to NHMFC on September 9, 2013, they learned that Atty. Ramon was no longer employed there. They later met with her at the Regional Trial Court, where she assured them that the redemption process was underway. However, when they inquired again on November 27, 2013, they found that Atty. Ramon had neither deposited the redemption price nor filed the necessary documents.

Despite their attempts to recover their money through various communications, Atty. Ramon failed to comply and did not appear for subsequent hearings. Consequently, Verlita and Raymond filed a disbarment complaint against her with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).

Findings and Recommendations of the IBP

The IBP proceeded with the investigation ex parte when Atty. Ramon failed to respond to the complaint or attend the scheduled hearings. Commissioner Arsenio P. Adriano concluded that Atty. Ramon had violated Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility due to her deceitful actions and recommended a two-year suspension from the practice of law, in addition to ordering her to return the P350,000 with legal interest.

Ruling of the Court

The Court found Atty. Ramon guilty of dishonesty and deceit, citing her violation of both the Lawyer’s Oath and specific ethical provisions mandated for lawyers. The Court emphasized the importance of probity and moral integrity within the legal profession, noting that Atty. Ramon's actions had severely undermined public trust in lawyers. The respondent misled the complainants into believing she could facilitate the redemption process by failing to disclose that she was no longer connected with the NHMFC and by falsely claiming to have initiated the redemption procedure.

Moreover, her neglect to adhere to legal obligations and her breach of fiduciary duty to her clients further aggravated her misconduct. The lack of intent was deemed irrelevant

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.