Case Summary (A.C. No. 12833)
Antecedents
In the legal dispute, various amounts were transferred by Amada to Atty. Ferrer on different dates for the settlement of the case. Despite receiving the entire sum, Atty. Ferrer acknowledged only a portion paid to Salvacion, alleging that additional payments had been made directly to Salvacion's daughter. When Salvacion filed an administrative complaint against him for failure to turn over the funds, Atty. Ferrer contested her claims, arguing that the acknowledgment receipts were fabricated.
Procedural Developments
The Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) conducted an investigation, during which Atty. Ferrer admitted to having received the full amount but failed to substantiate his claim regarding payments made to Salvacion's daughter. The Commission found evidence of Atty. Ferrer's misappropriation of funds and recommended a two-year suspension from the practice of law, considering this was his first infraction.
Ruling on the Facts
The Court adopted the IBP's findings, highlighting the absolute duty of lawyers to account for all client funds. Atty. Ferrer’s failure to return the balance of P295,000.00 upon demand constituted misappropriation. The evidence presented by Salvacion—comprising special powers of attorney, acknowledgment receipts, a memorandum of agreement, and demand letters—supported her claims, whereas Atty. Ferrer’s defense was largely unsubstantiated.
Legal and Ethical Standards
The ruling underscored that a lawyer's fiduciary duty involves high fidelity and good faith towards client funds. The failure to return those funds upon demand presumes misappropriation, which is a grave violation of professional ethics and could lead to both disciplinary action and criminal prosecution. Atty. Ferrer, aware of these ethical obligations, nonetheless neglected to fulfill them effectively.
Imposed Sanctions and Compliance
Ultimately, the Court adjusted the penalty from a two-year suspension to a six-month suspension, taking into acco
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 12833)
Case Overview
- Parties Involved:
- Complainant: Salvacion C. Romo
- Respondent: Atty. Orheim T. Ferrer
- Docket Number: A.C. No. 12833
- Date of Resolution: November 10, 2020
- Court: Supreme Court of the Philippines (En Banc)
Antecedents
- In 2006, Salvacion Romo engaged Atty. Ferrer's services for a legal action against Amada Yu for a violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang (BP) 22.
- Amada Yu settled the case with payments totaling P375,000.00 directed to Atty. Ferrer on various dates:
- P50,000.00 on March 6, 2006
- P50,000.00 on March 15, 2006
- P20,000.00 on June 6, 2006
- P50,000.00 on October 6, 2006
- P5,000.00 on November 16, 2006
- P10,000.00 on December 9, 2006
- P50,000.00 on December 18, 2006
- P10,000.00 on January 10, 2007
- P10,000.00 on February 19, 2007
- P120,000.00 on March 15, 2007
- Atty. Ferrer only remitted P80,000.00 to Salvacion, leading her to demand the remaining P295,000.00.
- Atty. Ferrer promised to settle the balance by October 15, 2012, offering a land title as collateral but failed to comply.
- After being ignored, Salvacion filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Ferrer, supported by evidence including a special power of attorney, acknowledgment receipts, a memorandum of agreement, and demand letters.
Arguments Presented by Atty. Ferrer
- Atty. Ferrer claimed to have remitted P120,000.00 and asserted that the remaining payments were given directly to Salvacion's daughter.
- He did not provide receipts for