CBD A.C. No. 313 - ATTY. AUGUSTO G. NAVARRO, FOR AND IN BEHALF OF PAN-ASIA INTERNATIONAL COMMODITIES, INC., COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. ROSENDO MENESES III.

Ruling

accordingly received an ex parte the testimony of complainants sole witness, Estrellita Valdez, and other documentary evidence. [10] Thereafter, complainant rested its case. Respondent filed a so-called Urgent Ex-parte Motion for Reconsideration with Motion to Recall Complainants Witness for Cross-Examination [11] which was granted by the Commission. [12] Estrellita Valdez was directed by the Commission to appear on the scheduled hearing for cross-examination. Several postponement and resetting of hearings were later requested and granted by the Commission. When the case was set for hearing for the last time on May 31, 1996, respondent failed to attend despite due notice and repeated warnings. Consequently, the Commission considered him to have waived his right to present evidence in his defense and declared the case submitted for resolution. [13] On February 4, 1997, the Commission on Bar Discipline, through its Investigating Commissioner Victor C. Fernandez, submitted its Report and Recommendation [14] to the Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. The Commission ruled that the refusal and/or failure of respondent to account for the sum of P50,000.00 he received from complainant for the settlement of the aforestated case of Lai Chan Kow and Arthur Bretaña proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that he misappropriated the same, hence he deserved to be penalized. The Commission recommended that respondent Meneses he suspended from the practice of the legal profession for a period of three (3) years and directed to return the P50,000.00 he received from the petitioner within fifteen (15) days from notice of the resolution. It further provided that failure on his part to comply with such requirement would result in his disbarment. [15] The Board of Governors adopted and approved the report and recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner in its Resolution No. XII-97-133, dated July 26, 1997. [16] On August 15, 1997, the Court received the Notice of Resolution, the Report and Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner, and the records of this case through the Office of the Bar Confidant for final action pursuant to Section 12 (b) of Rule 139-B. [17] It appears therefrom that respondent was duly furnished a copy of said resolution, with the investigating commissioners report and recommendation annexed thereto. The Court agrees with the findings and conclusion of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines that respondent Meneses misappropriated the money entrusted to him and which he has failed and/or refused to account for to his client despite repeated demands therefor. Such conduct on the part of respondent indicating his unfitness for the confidence and trust reposed on him, or showing such lack of personal honesty or of good moral character as to render him unworthy of public confidence, constitutes a ground for disciplinary action extending to disbarment. [18] Respondent Meneses misconduct constitute a gross violatio