PHILIPPINE AMUSEMENT GAMING CORPORATION vs. ATTY.

DANTE
CARANDANG
A.C. No. 700 January 0! "00#$$ CANON %
&ACTS'
The respondent, Atty. Carandang, is the president of Bingo Royale, Incorporated (Bingo Royale),
a private corporation organized under the laws of the hilippines. !n "e#ruary $, %&&&,
A'C!R and Bingo Royale e(ecuted a )'rant of Authority to !perate Bingo 'a*es.+ Article
, of this docu*ent *andates Bingo Royale to re*it $-. of its gross sales to A'C!R. This
$-. is divided into %/. to A'C!R and /. franchise ta( to the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
In the course of its operations, Bingo Royale incurred arrears a*ounting to 0,-01,233.%1 as of
4ove*#er %/, $--%. Instead of de*anding the pay*ent therefor, A'C!R allowed Bingo
Royale and respondent Atty. Carandang to pay the said a*ount in *onthly install*ent of
3--,---.-- fro* 5uly $--% to 5une $--3. Bingo Royale then issued to A'C!R twenty four
($1) Ban6 of Co**erce chec6s in the su* of 7,$--,---.-- signed #y respondent. 8owever,
when the chec6s were deposited after the end of each *onth at the 9and Ban6, :.4. Avenue
Branch, ;anila, they were all dishonored #y reason of Bingo Royale<s )Closed Account.+
=espite A'C!R<s de*and letters dated 4ove*#er %$ and =ece*#er %$, $--%, and "e#ruary
%$, $--$, respondent failed to pay the a*ounts of the chec6s. Thus, A'C!R filed with the
!ffice of the City rosecutor of ;anila cri*inal co*plaints for violations of Batas a*#ansa
(B..) Blg. $$ against respondent.
A'C!R contends that in issuing those #ouncing chec6s, respondent is lia#le for serious
*isconduct, violation of the Attorney<s !ath and violation of the Code of rofessional
Responsi#ility> and prays that his na*e #e stric6en fro* the Roll of Attorneys. In his
)!pposition+ to the co*plaint, respondent averred that he is not lia#le for issuing #ouncing
chec6s #ecause they were drawn #y Bingo Royale. 8is act of doing so )is not related to the
office of a lawyer.+ Respondent e(plained that since the start of its operations, Bingo Royale has
#een e(periencing financial difficulties due to *eager sales. 8ence, it incurred arrearages in
paying A'C!R<s shares and failed to pay the a*ounts of the chec6s. !n 4ove*#er $-, $--%,
A'C!R closed the operations of Bingo Royale. This pro*pted the latter to file with the
Regional Trial Court, Branch /&, ;a6ati City, a co*plaint for da*ages against A'C!R,
doc6eted as Civil Case 4o. -%?%07%. @u#seAuently, Bingo Royale #eca*e #an6rupt.
Respondent now *aintains that the dishonor of the chec6s was caused #y circu*stances #eyond
his control and pleads that our power to dis#ar hi* *ust #e e(ercised with great caution.
ISSUE'
Bhether or not respondent Atty. Carandang is lia#le for serious *isconduct and violated the
Attorney<s oath and code of professional responsi#ility
HELD'
In his Report and Reco**endation, Atty. =oroteo B. Aguila, the Investigating IB
Co**issioner, *ade the following findings and o#servationsC Bhether to issue or not chec6s in
favor of a payee is a voluntary act. It is clearly a choice for an individual, whether in a personal
capacity or officer of a corporation, to do so after assessing and weighing the conseAuences and
ris6s for doing so. The Code of rofessional Responsi#ility reAuires a lawyer to o#ey the laws of
the land and pro*ote respect for law and the legal processes. It also prohi#its a lawyer fro*
engaging in unlawful conduct (Canon % D Rule %.-%). By issuing the #ouncing chec6s in #latant
violation of B.. Blg. $$, respondent clearly was irresponsi#le and displayed lac6 of concern for
the rights of others nor for the canons of professional responsi#ility (Castillo v. Taguines, $/1
@CRA //1). Atty. Carandang deserves to #e suspended fro* the practice of law for a period of
one year.

Co**issioner Aguila then reco**ended that respondent #e suspended fro* the practice of law
for one (%) year. !n @epte*#er $7, $--3, the IB Board of 'overnors passed Resolution 4o.
E,I?$--3?%77 adopting and approving Co**issioner Aguila<s Report and Reco**endation
with *odification in the sense that the reco**ended penalty is reduced to suspension of si( (0)
*onths
Respondent li6ewise violated the Attorney<s !ath that he will, a*ong others, o#ey the laws> and
the Code of rofessional Responsi#ility, specifically the following provisionsC
Canon % F A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, o()y *+) ,a-s
o. *+) ,an/ an/ 0ro1o*) r)s0)2* .or *+) ,a- an/ ,)3a, 0ro2)ss)s.
Rule %.-% F A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
i**oral or deceitful conduct.
Canon 7 F A lawyer shall a* a,, *41)s u0+o,/ *+) 4n*)3r4*y an/
/43n4*y o. *+) ,)3a, 0ro.)ss4on and support the activities of the Integrated
Bar.
Rule 7.-3 F A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely
reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in pu#lic or
private life, #ehave in a scandalous *anner to the discredit of the legal
profession.

5HERE&ORE, Atty. =ante A. Carandang is declared GUILTY of serious *isconduct and
violations of the Attorney<s !ath and the Code of rofessional Responsi#ility. As reco**ended
#y the IB Board of 'overnors, he is SUSPENDED fro* the practice of law for si( (0) *onths
effective fro* notice.