AC 6972; (October, 2008) (Digest)
G.R. No. A.C. No. 6972 October 17, 2008
Jerry T. Wong, complainant, vs. Atty. Salvador N. Moya II, respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Jerry T. Wong, owner of J & L Agro-vets, retained the legal services of respondent Atty. Salvador N. Moya II for debt collection and personal cases. As their relationship developed, respondent asked for financial help. Complainant purchased a car on installment for respondent, issuing postdated checks to the seller, Transfarm. Respondent issued checks to complainant for reimbursement, but these were dishonored for reason “Account Closed,” and respondent refused to replace them. Complainant also introduced respondent to suppliers from whom respondent obtained construction materials on credit amounting to ₱164,000.00, which he failed to pay. Furthermore, in a case handled by respondent for complainant against Berting Diwa, respondent received a payment of ₱15,680.50 from Diwa to satisfy a judgment but did not inform complainant, who only learned of it later. A complaint for disbarment was filed with the IBP-CBD. Respondent filed multiple motions for extension and a motion to dismiss but ultimately failed to file a verified answer despite orders and opportunities from the IBP-CBD. The IBP Investigating Commissioner recommended a one-year suspension. The IBP Board of Governors modified this to a two-year suspension, to be served successively with another suspension from a separate case. Respondent appealed.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Atty. Salvador N. Moya II should be disciplined for professional misconduct.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the IBP’s recommendation with modification. Respondent was found guilty of gross misconduct and violation of the Lawyer’s Oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility. His issuance of worthless checks constituted a violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, which is a crime involving moral turpitude reflecting on his fitness to practice law. His failure to account for and deliver the funds received from Diwa constituted gross dishonesty. His disregard of IBP-CBD orders by failing to file an answer demonstrated contempt for judicial authorities. The Court suspended respondent from the practice of law for two (2) years, with a warning that repetition of similar acts would be dealt with more severely.