Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

CORDON V.

BALICANTA
FACTS:
Cordon, along with her daughter, inherited some properties from her husband with
the help of Atty Balicanta. Subsequently, Atty Balicanta enticed them to form
a corporation to develop the real properties inherited. Such corp. was formed, a
nd the properties were registered in the corp. s name. Atty Balicanta was the one
who single-handedly ran the corp. s affairs, by being it s Chairman, President, Gene
ral Manager, and treasurer. By being such officers, he made a number of acts: 1
) made Cordon sign a voting trust agreement; 2) made Cordon sign a SPA to sell/m
ortgage properties; 3) transferred title of some of the properties to other peop
le. And by using spurious Board resolutions, Atty Balicanta also made the follow
ing acts: 1) obtained a loan from Land Bank using the properties as collateral;
2) Sold the Corp s right to redeem the properties to another person; 3) demolished
the ancestral home of the Cordon s and sold the lot to another person. In all of
these, Atty Balicanta did not account for the proceeds coming the sales and disp
ositions.
The Cordons made several demands for Atty Balicanta to give back the properties
and to account the proceeds of the loan. When such demands were unheeded, The Co
rdons terminated Balicanta s services and filed a complaint for disbarment against
the latter in the IBP. The Commissioner, in its report, recommended for Balican
ta s disbarment as well. The IBP Board of Governors resolved that Balicanta be sus
pended for 5 years for such conduct.
ISSUE/S:
W/N Balicanta be disbarred .
HELD: YES! Disbarred.
RATIO:
Deceitful Conduct
The fraudulent acts he carried out against his client followed a well thought of
plan to misappropriate the corporate properties and funds entrusted to him. He
started his devious scheme by making himself the President, Chairman of the Boa
rd, Director and Treasurer of the corporation, although he knew he was prohibite
d from assuming the position of President and Treasurer at the same time. He als
o entered into dishonest transactions under the cloak of sham resolutions. His m
isdemeanors reveal a deceitful scheme to use the corporation as a means to conve
rt for his own personal benefit properties left to him in trust by complainant a
nd her daughter.
Side Doctrine:
Good moral character is more than just the absence of bad character. Such charac
ter expresses itself in the will to do the unpleasant thing if it is right and t
he resolve not to do the pleasant thing if it is wrong. This must be so because v
ast interests are committed to his care; he is the recipient of unbounded trust
and confidence; he deals with his client s property, reputation, his life, his all
.