SAMPLE CASE DIGEST

JKC-2015

I. SHORT TITLE:

ANDRADA V. CERA

II. FULL TITLE:

10187,

Celina F. Andrada versus Atty. Rodrigo Cera A.C. No.

July 22, 2015, J. Brion

III. TOPIC:

Legal Ethics CPR

IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Sometime 2009, Celina F. Andrada (Andrada) engaged the services of Atty.
Rodrigo Cera (Cera) to represent her in an annulment of marriage case.
Copies of the birth certificates of the children of Andrada, as issued by the
National Statistics Office (NSO), were needed for the filing of the case. Said
certificates were however not filed with NSO since Andradas husband failed
to completely accomplish the same. Hence, Andrada gave Cera P3,000.00 to
process with the NSO the registration and issuance of the certificates. An
additional P10,000.00 was given to Cera for the conduct of the psychological
examination on Cera and her children relative to the case. Upon follow up in
2010, Andrada was asked by the NSO to produce the receipts. She then
requested the same from Cera but Cera failed to produce the same. Andrada
also learned from the NSO that no payment was made. On May 29, 2011,
Andrada demanded for the surrender of the receipt and the return of the
P10,000.00. Despite receipt of the demand on May 30, 2011, Cera did not
heed the demand.
V. STATEMENT OF THE CASE:
On June 7, 2011, Andrada filed an administrative complaint before the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD).
IBP Investigating Commissioner found Cera guilty of violating Canons 1 and
16 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) and recommended the
imposition of three (3) years suspension from the practice of law. The IBP
Board of Governors adopted his findings but modified the recommended
penalty to one (1) year.
VI. ISSUE:
1. Whether or not Cera violated Canon 1 of the CPR.
2. Whether or not Cera violated Canon 16 of the CPR.
VII. RULING:
1. Yes, Cera violated Canon 1. He did not exert effort on his clients case, lied
to her and reneged on his obligations. His actions show negligence and lack
of zeal. He violated Rule 1.01 of Canon 1 due to his unlawful, dishonest,
immoral and deceitful conduct. In relation thereto, he also violated Rule
18.03 of Canon 18 when he neglected the legal matter entrusted to him.
2. Yes, he violated Canon 16. He misappropriated the funds entrusted to him
when he unlawfully withheld the same and when he failed to use the same
for the intended purposes, thus violating Canon 16 which holds a lawyer in

SAMPLE CASE DIGEST

JKC-2015

trust of all moneys and properties of his client that may come into his
possession. Rule 16.03 of the same canon was also violated when he failed
to deliver the funds and property of Andrada when due and upon demand.
VIII. DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
Wherefore, respondent Atty. Rodrigo Cera is hereby suspended from the
practice of law for ONE (1) YEAR. He is warned that a repetition of the same
or similar act shall be dealt with more severely.