A.C. No. 6738 - GABRIELA CORONEL, VS. ATTY. NELSON A. CUNANAN.

Ruling

Accordingly, neither the affidavit of desistance nor the Joint Motion To Dismiss should bear any weight, or be relevant in determining whether or not the respondent was fit to remain as a member of the Law Profession. The desistance by the complainant was a matter that was the concern only of the parties, and was non-binding on the Court. What will be decisive in this administrative proceeding are the facts borne out by the evidence competently adduced herein. [19] The complainant testified that the respondent had proposed to her two methods to transfer title, and one was patently contrary to law. She presented documentary proof to her testimony against him. She established that he had not communicated with her after receiving the money and the documents. The affidavit of desistance and the Joint Motion To Dismiss only came about after the complainant had completed her testimony, a true indication that their submission was done in hindsight and insincerely. His remorse, if it was that, came too late. In Bengco v. Bernardo , [20] the respondent lawyer was suspended for one year from the practice of law because he had represented that he could expedite the titling of the clients' property with the help of his contacts in various government offices, including the Department of Natural Resources, the Community Environment Office, and Register of Deeds. After convincing his clients through such representations, and taken their money for that purpose, he did not bother to even update them on the progress of the undertaking. In that regard, he was also convicted of estafa . In Espinosa v. Omaña , [21] the respondent lawyer was also suspended for one year from the practice of law for advising her clients that they could legally live separately and dissolve their marriage by executing the Kasunduan ng Paghihiwalay ( Agreement to Separate ) that she had drafted. Her advice was blatantly contrary to law and public policy. ACCORDINGLY , the Court ADOPTS and AFFIRMS the Resolution dated May 14, 2011 of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors, WITH MODIFICATION as to the recommended penalty by suspending respondent Atty. Nelson A. Cunanan from the practice of law for one year effective immediately upon his receipt of this decision. The Court ORDERS respondent Atty. Cunanan to RETURN to the complainant the amount of P70,000.00 within 10 days from receipt of this decision, and to report on his compliance within five days thereafter. Let copies of this decision be entered in the personal records of respondent Atty. Cunanan in the Office of the Bar Confidant, and be furnished to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and the Office of the Court Administrator for dissemination to all courts in the country. SO ORDERED.