SECOND DIVISION
LUTHGARDA
F.
FERNANDEZ,
Complainant,
A.C.
No.
5623
December 11, 2003
-versus-
ATTY.
FIDEL M.
CABRERA
II,
Respondent.
R E S O L U T I O
N
QUISUMBING,
J.:
In a Verified Complaint[1]
dated February 15, 2002, filed before the Office of the Bar Confidant
of
this Court, complainant Luthgarda F. Fernandez sought the disbarment of
respondent, Atty. Fidel M. Cabrera II, for malpractice, deceit, and
gross
misconduct. Complainant alleges that she engaged the services of
respondent
sometime in July, 2001 to handle the cases of her associates in Baguio
City and entrusted to him the records of the said cases. After paying
respondent's
acceptance fee of P20,000 and P2,500 appearance fee, respondent
disappeared
with the records of the cases. Respondent used to hold office at PO5
Prince
Jun Condo, 42 Timog Avenue, Quezon City, but could no longer be located
there. Nor did he leave a forwarding address.[2]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In a Resolution dated
April 3, 2002,[3]
this Court required respondent to file his comment within ten (10) days
from notice. However, the copy of the said Resolution was returned to
the
Court unserved with the notation "RTS MOVED OUT." Thereafter, this
Court
required complainant by Resolution dated July 24, 2002[4]
to submit the correct and present address of respondent.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Complainant, through
her counsel, filed a Manifestation[5]
dated September 13, 2002, stating that she cannot comply with the
Court's
July 24, 2002 Resolution requiring her to submit the correct and
present
address of the respondent. She explained that she filed the complaint
for
disbarment against respondent precisely because after taking hold of
the
records of the cases complainant entrusted to him and after getting
initially
paid for the services he would render, respondent suddenly disappeared
and could no longer be located in his given address nor in the
addresses
that complainant gathered as his former and allegedly present addresses.[6]
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the Court resolved on November
20, 2002[7]
to refer the case to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines for
investigation,
report, and recommendation. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The notices of hearing
dated February 29, 2003 and March 19, 2003 likewise having been
returned
to the IBP unserved with the notation "MOVED", the IBP deemed to
consider
the notices as served on the respondent by substituted service under
Section
8,[8]
Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.cralaw:red
On June 21, 2003, the
IBP Board of Governors passed Resolution No. XV-2003-366, the full text
of which reads as follows:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
RESOLVED to
ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED, the Report and
Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner of the above-entitled
case, herein made part of this Resolution/Decision as Annex "A"; and,
finding
the recommendation fully supported by the evidence on record and the
applicable
laws and rules, and considering that respondent committed gross
misconduct
which shows him to be unfit for the office and unworthy of the
privilege
which his license and law confer upon him, Atty. Fidel M. Cabrera II is
hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for one (1) year.[9]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
This Resolution is now
before this Court in view of the conclusion rendered and the penalty
recommended
by the IBP Board of Governors.
Acceptance of money
from a client establishes an attorney-client relationship and gives
rise
to the duty of fidelity to the client's cause. The canons of
professional
responsibility require that once an attorney agrees to handle a case,
he
should undertake the task with zeal, care, and utmost devotion.[10]
An attorney is bound to protect his client's interest to the best of
his
ability and with utmost diligence. It is the duty of a lawyer to serve
his client with competence and diligence and he should exert his best
efforts
to protect within the bounds of law the interest of his client. A
lawyer
should never neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, otherwise his
negligence
in fulfilling his duty will render him liable for disciplinary action.[11]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
As clearly stated in
the Code
of Professional Responsibility:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Canon 18 —
A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Rule 18.03 — A
lawyer
shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.
Rule 18.04 — A
lawyer
shall keep his client informed of the status of his case and shall
respond
within a reasonable time to the client's request for information.[12]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The failure to exercise
that degree of vigilance and attention expected of an Officer of the
Court
makes such lawyer unworthy of the trust reposed in him by his clients
and
makes him answerable not just to his client but also to the legal
profession,
the courts, and the society. When a lawyer violates his duties to his
client,
the courts, the legal profession, and the public, he engages in
unethical
and unprofessional conduct for which he should be held accountable.
The circumstances of
this case indubitably show respondent's failure to live up to his
duties
as a lawyer in consonance with the strictures of the lawyer's oath and
the Code of Professional Responsibility, thereby warranting his
suspension
from the practice of law. Respondent's action projects his appalling
indifference
to his client's cause and a brazen disregard of his duties as a lawyer.
Not only did he fail to render service of any kind, he also absconded
with
the records of the cases with which he was entrusted. Then to top it
all,
he kept the money complainant paid to him. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Such conduct is unbecoming
of a member of the bar, for a lawyer's professional and personal
conduct
must at all times be kept beyond reproach and above suspicion.[13]
The duty of a lawyer is to uphold the integrity and dignity of the
legal
profession at all times. This can only be done by faithfully performing
the lawyer's duties to society, to the bar, to the courts and to his
clients.
Given the crucial importance of his role in the administration of
justice,
we cannot tolerate any misconduct by a lawyer, which tends to besmirch
the fair name of an honorable profession.[14]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
WHEREFORE, finding respondent
Atty. Fidel M. Cabrera II guilty of serious neglect of his duties as a
lawyer as embodied in Canon 18, Rule 18.03 and 18.04 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility, he is SUSPENDED from the practice
of
law for one (1) year. Let a copy of the Resolution be attached to the
personal
records of Atty. Fidel M. Cabrera II in the Office of the Bar Confidant
and copies be furnished the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and
all courts in the country for their information and guidance.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
SO ORDERED. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Puno, J., (Chairman), Austria-Martinez,
Callejo, Sr. and Tinga, JJ.,
concur.chan
robles virtual law library
____________________________
Endnotes:
[1]
Rollo, p. 2.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[2]
Id. at 2, 7.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[3]
Id. at 3.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[4]
Id. at 9.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[5]
Id. at 11.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[6]
Ibid.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[7]
Id. at 12.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[8]
SEC. 8. Substituted service. — If service of pleadings, motions,
notices,
resolutions, orders and other papers cannot be made under the two
preceding
sections, the office and place of residence of the party or his counsel
being unknown, service may be made by delivering the copy to the clerk
of court, with proof of failure of both personal service and service by
mail. The service is complete at the time of such delivery.chan
[9]
Rollo, p. 19.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[10]
Emiliano Court Townhouses Homeowners Association v. Atty. Dioneda, Adm.
Case No. 5162, 20 March 2003, p. 7.
[11]
Perea v. Atty. Almadro, Adm. Case No. 5246, 20 March 2003, p. 7.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[12]
Id. at 6.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[13]
Grande v. Atty. De Silva, Adm. Case No. 4838, 29 July 2003, p. 4.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[14]
Id. at 5.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred |