IN RE: ATTY. ARTURO SAMANIEGO, RESPONDENT

The respondent attorney, Arturo Samaniego,
has been charged by the Solicitor General with malpractice and
recommended for proper disciplinary action.

Prior to 1948, Bernardo Samaniego (a cousin of the respondent)
filed a war damage claim with the U. S. Philippine War Damage
Commission. He was married to Isabel Medina and had three children,
only one of whom is living. Save for a brief period in 1944, Bernardo
Samaniego and his wife did not live together for about fifteen years,
during which, however, he cohabited with Alexandra Cruz. Bernardo
Samaniego and Alexandra Cruz had six children, although only four are
living. Bernardo Samaniego died on February 29, 1948.

Sometime before September 21, 1948, a check (No. 383421) for
P841.50 was issued by the U.S. Philippine War Damage Commission in the
name of Bernardo Samaniego as a first payment of his claim. Claiming to
be the widow of Bernardo Samaniego, Alexandra Cruz succeeded in getting
the check from the postmaster of Malolos, Bulacan.

On September 21, 1948, the respondent and Alexandra Cruz went to the
National City Bank of New York, Manila, with a view to cashing the
check. The respondent sought the assistance of an acquaintance, Proceso
Jodloman (an employee of the bank). After the respondent had signed the
name of Bernardo Samaniego on the check, Proceso Jodloman (who has
known the respondent since 1947) identified the same by affixing his
own signature. After the respondent had again signed the name of the
payee, Bernardo Samaniego, on the check before the bank teller, the
latter paid its amount. Alexandra Cruz admitted having received the
whole amount, although she alleged that she gave to the respondent the
sum of P100 in payment of her obligation to respondent’s mother.

The respondent claims that he had always honestly believed that;
Alexandra Cruz was the lawful wife of his cousin, Bernardo Samaniego,
and that he signed the name of Bernardo Samaniego in good faith,
motivated solely by a desire to help Alexandra Cruz who needed the
money with which to meet her many obligations and to buy medicine for
her sick child. The respondent further argues that he never represented
himself to Proceso Jodloman as Bernardo Samaniego, the payee of the
check, for, as a matter of fact, he exhibited his residence
certificate, car registration, and license to carry a pistol, as well
as a poster of his candidacy fox Governor of Bulacan.

While we are inclined to believe that the respondent showed to
Proceso Jodloman the papers above mentioned, there is ample room for
holding that the latter did not bother to scrutinize said papers and he
might have readily thought that the respondent was Bernardo Samaniego.
Indeed, according to the testimony of Proeeso Jodloman, he had before
this case known the respondent only as Attorney Samaniego and an
ex-governor. This knowledge—undoubtedly engendering a. high regard for
the respondent—naturally might have led Proceso Jodloman to suppose
that everything was regular, namely, that the respondent was the payee
of the check. He must have acted in good faith, to the same extent
claimed by the respondent.

Even if the respondent acted without malice in cashing the check
and did not profit thereby, he knew that he was not Bernardo Samaniego
and he signed the letter’s name with full knowledge that he was dead.
The respondent, a lawyer, surely anticipated that he could not cash the
check otherwise than by signing, not his own name, but that of the dead
payee. To this extent he misled the bank, and thereby committed an act
indicative of moral laxity, least expected from and highly unbecoming a
member the Bar. The excuse that the respondent merely wanted to help
Alexandra Cruz, known to him as the widow of Bernardo Samaniego, is not
valid, since he is assumed to be conversant with the legal requirements
and procedure by which the widow could establish her right to the
check. said excuse and respondent’s good faith may, however, serve to
mitigate his liability.

All things considered, including the circumstance that, although
the drawer and drawee of the check cannot be said to have suffered any
actual damage, the rights of the lawful wife (Isabel Medina) and heirs
of the deceased Bernardo Samaniego have to be reckoned with, we hereby
resolve to order that the respondent be, as he is hereby, suspended
from the practice of law for a period of one year from and after the
date this resolution shall have become final.

Feria, Pablo, Baengzon, Padilla, Tuason, Reyes, Jugo, and Bautista Angelo, JJ., concur.