AC 7027; (January, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. A.C. No. 7027; January 30, 2009
Tanu Reddi, Complainant, vs. Atty. Diosdado C. Sebrio, Jr., Respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Tanu Reddi, an American endodontist, sought to establish a hospital in the Philippines. Her assistant, Immaculada Luistro, suggested engaging in real estate to generate funds. Respondent Atty. Diosdado C. Sebrio, Jr. was introduced to assist her. Since complainant, as a foreigner, could not own land, respondent advised forming corporations (Tagaytay Twins, Inc., Manila Chic Twins, Inc., and Tanu, Inc.) to effect purchases. Respondent facilitated several property transactions for complainant, involving substantial sums of money:
1. Tagaytay City Property: Respondent represented that his client, Teresita Monzon, owned an untitled 27-hectare property. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was executed, with complainant agreeing to finance titling. Complainant paid amounts totaling US$1,000, ₱2,000,000, and US$36,360. She later discovered part of the property had been foreclosed and was subject to litigation where respondent was Teresita’s counsel.
2. Las Piñas City Property: Respondent offered a house and lot allegedly owned by Francisca Parales, who needed funds for her daughter’s surgery. Complainant also sent money for a Jollibee franchise, with a profit-sharing agreement.
3. Makati City Property: Respondent introduced complainant to Mario C. Mangco, alleged legal officer of the intestate estate of Faustino Ramos, owner of a property in Makati. An MOA was executed, and complainant released ₱12,000,000. She later learned the property was neither owned by the estate nor for sale.
4. Quezon City Property: Respondent proposed buying the land under SM North Mall, representing it belonged to a client. Complainant sent money for filing an injunction, back taxes, and titling.
5. Pasay City Property: Complainant sent money to purchase a vacant lot on Roxas Boulevard, allegedly owned by Florenda Estrada and Alma Mallari, and to cover related expenses including bribing a judge. She later discovered the lot was titled to banks and did not exist as represented.
Complainant’s counsel demanded the return of US$3,000,000, but no amount was returned. Respondent admitted receiving US$544,828, claiming it was used for the Las Piñas property, corporate setup, and downpayment on the Makati property. He denied other allegations. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) investigated, and respondent failed to appear at the mandatory conference. The IBP Commissioner found respondent committed fraudulent acts and recommended disbarment, which the IBP Board of Governors adopted.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Atty. Diosdado C. Sebrio, Jr. should be disbarred for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility and the lawyer’s oath through fraudulent and deceitful conduct in handling complainant’s real estate investments.
RULING
Yes, respondent is DISBARRED. The Supreme Court affirmed the IBP’s findings. Respondent’s actions constituted gross misconduct, dishonesty, and deceit, violating the lawyer’s oath and specific provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility:
1. He violated Canon 1 and Rule 1.01 by engaging in unlawful, dishonest, and deceitful conduct. He misrepresented ownership and status of properties, offered fictitious or unsaleable properties, and tampered with corporate documents (intercalating names in Tanu, Inc.’s Articles of Incorporation).
2. He violated Canon 16 and Rule 16.01 by failing to account for and return money received in trust from the client.
3. He violated Rule 15.06 by implying he could influence public officials (suggesting bribery of a judge).
The Court found respondent’s scheme to defraud complainant was deliberate and sustained over time, exploiting her lack of familiarity with Philippine laws. His acts constituted gross misconduct warranting disbarment. The Court also ordered respondent to RETURN to complainant the admitted amount of US$544,828. Complainant is not precluded from litigating any balance in the proper forum. Respondent’s name is ORDERED STRICKEN from the Roll of Attorneys.
