AC 7815; (July, 2009) (Digest)
A.C. No. 7815; July 23, 2009
Dolores C. Belleza, Complainant, vs. Atty. Alan S. Macasa, Respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Dolores C. Belleza engaged respondent Atty. Alan S. Macasa to handle the criminal case of her son, who was arrested for violating Republic Act No. 9165 . Respondent agreed for a fee of ₱30,000, which complainant paid in full through their mutual friend, Joe Chua, on November 11, 17, and 18, 2004. No receipts were issued. On November 21, 2004, complainant gave respondent ₱18,000 to post a bail bond for her son’s provisional liberty. Again, no receipt was issued. The following day, complainant discovered respondent had not remitted the amount to the court. Respondent subsequently failed to act on the case, forcing complainant to secure the services of the Public Attorney’s Office. Demands for the return of the ₱18,000 were ignored.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Atty. Alan S. Macasa should be disciplined for professional misconduct.
RULING
Yes, respondent is guilty of gross misconduct warranting disbarment. The Court affirmed the findings of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD). Respondent violated multiple rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR). His failure to issue receipts for the attorney’s fees and the bail money, his misappropriation of the ₱18,000 intended for the court, and his subsequent abandonment of his client’s case constitute violations of Rule 1.01 (prohibiting dishonest or deceitful conduct), Rule 16.01 (requiring accounting of client funds), and Rule 16.02 (requiring separation of client funds). His actions demonstrated a betrayal of trust and a failure to uphold the fiduciary duties of a lawyer.
Furthermore, respondent displayed contempt for the legal process. Despite several extensions granted by the CBD, he failed to file an answer or a position paper to rebut the serious allegations, violating Rule 12.03 of the CPR. This unjustified disregard for the CBD’s lawful orders constituted disrespect for the judiciary. The Court emphasized that the practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions, including adherence to the highest standards of morality and fidelity. Respondent’s acts—collecting fees without rendering service, converting client funds for personal use, and abandoning his client—reveal a character unfit for the legal profession. Consequently, the Court disbarred respondent Atty. Alan S. Macasa, ordered his name stricken from the Roll of Attorneys, and directed him to return the total amount of ₱48,000 to complainant.