G.R. No. L-195. January 31, 1958.
In re: Attorney JESUS T. QUIAMBAO, respondent.

FACTS

On May 17, 1954, the Court of Appeals affirmed a decision of the Court of First Instance of Rizal and transmitted the record to the Supreme Court for possible disciplinary action against Attorney Jesus T. Quiambao for acts unbecoming a member of the Bar. The case originated from a transaction where Manuel Quiambao, the respondent’s brother and an agent of Yek Tong Lin Fire & Marine Insurance Co., offered to sell a parcel of land to Pedro R. Peralta for P15,000. Peralta accepted and deposited P11,000 in a bank. On February 9, 1949, Peralta and the Quiambao brothers went to Manila. Peralta handed P11,000 to Attorney Jesus T. Quiambao at the door of the law office of Honesto K. Bausa, the insurance company’s lawyer. Attorney Quiambao entered the office alone for about an hour. Upon emerging, he told Peralta to wait and later executed a receipt (Exhibit A) acknowledging receipt of P12,000 from Peralta (including P1,000 earnest money given earlier) to be held as Peralta’s attorney-in-fact pending issuance of the title. The title was never issued. Upon inquiry, Peralta learned from the company that the title had not been issued in his name. He demanded the return of the P12,000 from Attorney Quiambao, who failed to return it.
Attorney Quiambao claimed he returned the money in installments through his brother Manuel, with Peralta’s knowledge and consent, and that the sums were spent on land improvements and a loan to Manuel. He presented two documents dated March 10, 1950: Exhibit 1, signed by all three parties, stating the money was withdrawn by Manuel with Peralta’s knowledge; and Exhibit 2, a release executed by Peralta, stating he would collect the P12,000 from Manuel exclusively. The Court of Appeals found that Attorney Quiambao engineered a scheme, knowing the land (merely mortgaged to the company) was not for sale, to fraudulently obtain and appropriate Peralta’s P12,000, and later induced Peralta to sign the documents to relieve himself of liability.

ISSUE

Whether Attorney Jesus T. Quiambao should be disciplined for acts unbecoming a member of the Bar.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court disbarred Attorney Jesus T. Quiambao. The Court adopted the findings of the Court of Appeals that the respondent engineered a fraudulent scheme to obtain Peralta’s money, knowing the land was not for sale, and appropriated the funds for his own use. His subsequent acts in inducing Peralta to sign documents to release him from liability compounded his misconduct. By these acts, he demonstrated unworthiness to continue as a member of the legal profession.