Coronado v. Felongco
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Complainant Fely E. Coronado alleged that respondent Atty. Ernesto Felongco notarized a Deed of Promise to Sell purportedly signed by her deceased mother, Fe Vda. De Esteva. Complainant charged that Atty. Felongco connived with her brother, Pacifico Esteva, Jr., to facilitate the transfer of inheritance. Respondent claimed that Fe Vda. De Esteva appeared before him on September 2, 1982, with Pacifico and Florenda Faraon, the vendee. The deed was already signed by Esteva, who acknowledged her signature. Respondent asked for her residence certificate, which Esteva failed to present, prompting respondent to ask them to return the following day. On September 10, 1982, Florenda Faraon presented Esteva's residence certificate, informing respondent that Esteva could not appear as she was hospitalized. Respondent notarized the deed without knowing that Esteva had died on September 6, 1982. Procedural History: The case was referred to the Office of the Solicitor General and then to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation. The IBP Commissioner found that respondent violated the notarial law and recommended a six-month suspension. The IBP Board of Governors adopted the recommendation, and denied respondent's motion for reconsideration. The Petition: The case reached the Supreme Court on review of the IBP's findings and recommendation.
Issue(s)
Whether respondent Atty. Ernesto Felongco violated the notarial law by notarizing a deed of promise to sell when the acknowledging party was already deceased. Whether respondent Atty. Ernesto Felongco committed misconduct in the performance of his duties as a notary public.
Ruling
The Supreme Court found respondent Atty. Ernesto Felongco guilty of misconduct for violating the notarial law. He was suspended from his commission as Notary Public for a period of two (2) months, effective immediately, with a warning against future breaches of duty.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of violation of notarial law: The Court affirmed that respondent violated Section 1 of Public Act No. 2103, the Notarial Law. This law mandates that the person acknowledging an instrument must personally appear before the notary public or authorized officer. The acknowledgment in the Deed of Promise to Sell stated that Fe Esteva appeared on September 10, 1982, but she had died on September 6, 1982. This clearly contravened the requirement for personal appearance. The Court emphasized that notarization is not a mere formality; it elevates a private document to a public one, deserving of full faith and credit. Therefore, notaries public must exercise utmost care in performing their duties to maintain public confidence. On the issue of misconduct: The Court acknowledged that respondent made efforts to comply, as Esteva had appeared before him on September 2, 1982, and acknowledged her signature. However, he notarized the deed without knowledge of her subsequent death. The Court also considered that this was respondent's first offense and that he expressed remorse, which served as mitigating factors for the penalty imposed. Despite these mitigating circumstances, the violation of the notarial law was established, constituting misconduct.
Main Doctrine
A notary public must ensure that the party acknowledging the instrument personally appears before him and is known to him, and that the acknowledgment is the free act and deed of the party. Failure to observe these basic requirements constitutes misconduct and violates the notarial law.