Scribd
Upload
916 views2 pages

Ong Vs Delos Santos Digest

Benjamin Ong filed a complaint against attorney William Delos Santos for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. Ong had cashed a postdated check for Delos Santos for P100,000, but the check was dishonored. Delos Santos was found to have violated Canons 1 and 7 by engaging in unlawful and dishonest conduct that reflected poorly on the integrity of the legal profession. The Supreme Court ruled that Delos Santos was guilty of misconduct and suspended him from practice for 6 months.

Uploaded by

Ronellie Marie Tinaja
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
916 views2 pages

Ong Vs Delos Santos Digest

Benjamin Ong filed a complaint against attorney William Delos Santos for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. Ong had cashed a postdated check for Delos Santos for P100,000, but the check was dishonored. Delos Santos was found to have violated Canons 1 and 7 by engaging in unlawful and dishonest conduct that reflected poorly on the integrity of the legal profession. The Supreme Court ruled that Delos Santos was guilty of misconduct and suspended him from practice for 6 months.

Uploaded by

Ronellie Marie Tinaja
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

BENJAMIN Q. ONG vs. ATTY. WILLIAM F.

DELOS SANTOS

[A.C. No. 10179. March 4, 2014.]

(Legal Ethics)

FACTS:

Complainant Benjamin Ong was introduced to respondent Atty. William F. Delos Santos by

Sheriff Fernando Mercado of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila. In time, according to Ong,

Atty. Delos Santos asked him to encash his postdated check inasmuch as he was in dire need of

cash. To reassure Ong, respondent bragged about his lucrative practice and his good paying

clients. With this, petitioner handed Atty. Delos Santos the amount of P100, 000.00 in exchange

of the latter's check. When the check was dishonored for the reason that the account was closed,

petitioner relayed the matter to Atty. Delos Santos but the latter just ignored him. Ong brought a

criminal case of estafa and for violation of BP. Blg. 22 against the lawyer. Ong also brought this

disbarment complaint.

ISSUE:

W/N Atty. Delos Santos violate Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Canon 7, Rule 7.03 of the Code of

Professional Responsibility?

RULING:

Not only did Atty. Delos Santos violate the said Canons of Professional Responsibility but as

well as the Lawyer's Oath. Being a lawyer, Atty. Delos Santos was well aware of the objectives

and coverage of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22. He thereby swept aside his Lawyer's Oath that
enjoined him to support the Constitution and obey the laws. He also took for granted the express

commands of the Code of Professional Responsibility, specifically Canon 1, Rule 1.01, and

Canon 7, Rule 7.03.

CANON 1 — A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE

LAWS OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR THE LAW AND LEGAL

PROCESSES.

Rule 1.01 — A Lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful

conduct.

CANON 7 — A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY

AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES

OF THE INTEGRATED BAR.

Rule 7.03 — A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely refects on his fitness to

practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous

manner to the discredit of the legal profession.

It cannot be denied that Ong acceded to Atty. Delos Santos' request for encashment of the Check

because of his complete reliance on the nobility of the Legal Profession. Accordingly, Atty.

Delos Santos was guilty of serious misconduct, warranting appropriate administrative sanction

and suspended for 6 months from the practice of law.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy