This case involves a lawyer, Nicolas Torres, who was hired as the legal and claims manager for CF Sharp Crew Management Inc. Torres requested and received settlement checks from CF Sharp on behalf of seafarers, but deposited the checks into his own bank account instead of distributing them to the seafarers. CF Sharp filed a complaint against Torres with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). The IBP found Torres administratively liable for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Supreme Court agreed with the IBP's findings and determined that the proper penalty for Torres' actions was disbarment from the practice of law due to his misappropriation of client funds.
This case involves a lawyer, Nicolas Torres, who was hired as the legal and claims manager for CF Sharp Crew Management Inc. Torres requested and received settlement checks from CF Sharp on behalf of seafarers, but deposited the checks into his own bank account instead of distributing them to the seafarers. CF Sharp filed a complaint against Torres with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). The IBP found Torres administratively liable for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Supreme Court agreed with the IBP's findings and determined that the proper penalty for Torres' actions was disbarment from the practice of law due to his misappropriation of client funds.
This case involves a lawyer, Nicolas Torres, who was hired as the legal and claims manager for CF Sharp Crew Management Inc. Torres requested and received settlement checks from CF Sharp on behalf of seafarers, but deposited the checks into his own bank account instead of distributing them to the seafarers. CF Sharp filed a complaint against Torres with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). The IBP found Torres administratively liable for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Supreme Court agreed with the IBP's findings and determined that the proper penalty for Torres' actions was disbarment from the practice of law due to his misappropriation of client funds.
A.C. No. 10438, Sept 23, 2014 Complainant Corporation hired Atty. Nicolas Torres, a medical doctor and a lawyer by profession, as its Legal and Claims Manager to serve as its legal counsel and to oversee the administration and management of legal cases and medical- related claims instituted by seafarers against complainants various principals. In several cases, complainant issued several checks in different amounts as settlement of claims of seafarers upon the request of Torres. However, it was later discovered that Torres never gave the checks to the seafarers and instead had them deposited at International Exchange Bank, Banawe, Quezon City Branch, under Account No. 003-10-06902-1. Complainant filed the present complaint directly to the IBP. The IBP issued an order requiring Atty. Torres to answer, but he failed to do so. He also failed to appear in a mandatory conference. The essential issue in this case is whether or not respondent should be held administratively liable for violating the CPR. The IBP Investigating Commissioner found respondent administratively liable for violating the CPR. The IBP Board of Governors unanimously adopted the report of the Investigating Commissioner. After a judicious perusal of the records, the Supreme Court concurs with the findings of the IBP in its report and recommendation. It is fundamental that the relationship between a lawyer and his client is highly fiduciary and ascribes to a lawyer a great degree of fidelity and good faith. The highly fiduciary nature of this relationship imposes upon the lawyer the duty to account for the money or property collected or received for or from his client. This is the standard laid down by Rules 16.01 and 16.03, Canon 16 of the CPR. According to the SC, the IBP Investigating Commissioner correctly found that complainant had duly proven its charges against respondent. In particular, complainant had exposed respondents modus operandi of repeatedly requesting the issuance of checks purportedly for the purpose of settling seafarers claims against the complainants various principals, only to have such checks deposited to an unauthorized bank account, particularly International Exchange Bank, Banawe, Quezon City Branch, under Account No. 003-10-06902-
1. It is well-settled that when a lawyer receives money from the client
for a particular purpose, the lawyer is bound to render an accounting to the client showing that the money was spent for a particular purpose. And if he does not use the money for the intended purpose, the lawyer must immediately return the money to his client. This, respondent failed to do. Clearly, respondents acts of misappropriation constitute dishonesty, abuse of trust and confidence reposed in him by the complainant, and betrayal of his clients interests which he is duty-bound to protect. They are contrary to the mandate of Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the CPR. What is the proper penalty for Atty. Torres acts? The Investigating Commissioner recommended suspension from the practice of law for one (1) year. The IBP Board of Governors recommended suspension from practice of law for two (2) years. The Supreme Court held that the proper penalty is disbarment. Jurisprudence provides that in similar cases where lawyers misappropriated their clients money, the Court imposed upon them the ultimate penalty of disbarment from the practice of law. In Arellano University, Inc. v. Mijares III, the Court disbarred the lawyer for misappropriating his clients money intended for securing a certificate of title on the latters behalf. Similarly, in Freeman v. Reyes, the same penalty was imposed upon the lawyer who misappropriated the insurance proceeds of her clients deceased husband. Respondent's conduct of misappropriating complainant's money has made him unfit to remain in the legal profession. He has definitely fallen below the moral bar when he engaged in deceitful, dishonest, unlawful, and grossly immoral acts. WHEREFORE, respondent Nicolas C. Torres is found guilty of violating Rule 1.01, Canon 1 and Rules 16.01 and 16.03, Canon 16 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Accordingly, he is hereby DISBARRED from the practice of law and his name ordered STRICKEN OFF from the roll of attorneys.