This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2008-07-14 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In Sanchez v. Somoso, [41] the Court ruled that a lawyer who paid another with a personal check from a bank account which he knew has already been closed exhibited an extremely low regard to his commitment to the oath he took when he joined his peers, thereby seriously tarnishing the image of the profession which he should hold in high esteem. In Moreno v. Araneta, [42] we held that the issuance of worthless checks constitutes gross misconduct, as the effect transcends the private interests of the parties directly involved in the transaction and touches the interests of the community at large. | |||||
|
2006-03-24 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Consequently, we have held that the act of a person in issuing a check knowing at the time of the issuance that he or she does not have sufficient funds in, or credit with, the drawee bank for the payment of the check in full upon its presentment, is also a manifestation of moral turpitude.[22] | |||||