Alitagtag v. Garcia
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Complainant Violeta Flores Alitagtag filed a disbarment case against respondent Atty. Virgilio R. Garcia for falsification of a deed of donation and notarizing the same. Cesar B. Flores, the alleged donor, had two families. The questioned Deed of Donation involved a parcel of land and listed Cesar B. Flores as donor, Gregorio Gamad Flores (brother-in-law of respondent) as donee, and respondent's wife, mother-in-law, and respondent himself (as Notary Public) as privy to the document. Respondent was later appointed attorney-in-fact by the donee to administer and sell the property. A PNP Crime Laboratory report certified that the signature of Cesar B. Flores on the deed was not written by the same person who made his standard signatures. The Regional Trial Court of Pasig declared the deed of donation falsified and null and void. Procedural History: The Investigating Commissioner of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) recommended dismissal of the charges. However, the IBP Board of Governors recommended a two-year suspension for respondent Atty. Virgilio R. Garcia. The Petition: The Supreme Court reviewed the case and found the facts supported by evidence, but disagreed with the recommended penalty, finding respondent's conduct warranted disbarment.
Issue(s)
Whether respondent Atty. Virgilio R. Garcia is guilty of grave misconduct for falsifying and notarizing a deed of donation. Whether respondent's actions warrant disbarment from the practice of law.
Ruling
The Supreme Court found respondent Atty. Virgilio R. Garcia guilty of grave misconduct, ordering his disbarment from the practice of law and his name stricken off the Roll of Attorneys.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of grave misconduct for falsifying and notarizing a deed of donation: The Court found respondent guilty of grave misconduct. Respondent, as a notary public, is mandated by Act 2103, Section 1, to certify that the person acknowledging the instrument is known to him and is the same person who executed it, acknowledging it as his free act and deed. The PNP Crime Laboratory's report unequivocally stated that the signature of the donor on the deed of donation was not that of Cesar B. Flores. Respondent's claim that the deed was authentic was contradicted by expert findings. Furthermore, respondent failed to submit a copy of the notarized deed to the Office of the Clerk of Court, a mandatory requirement, offering a flimsy excuse involving his secretary and father-in-law. The Court noted respondent's privy relationship to the donor (father-in-law) and his appointment as attorney-in-fact by the donee (brother-in-law), indicating an active role in perpetuating a fraud with intent to gain. His actions demonstrated a deceitful act to prejudice a party, violating his solemn oath as a lawyer not to engage in unlawful, dishonest, or deceitful conduct. On the issue of whether respondent's actions warrant disbarment: The Court held that respondent's conduct warrants his severance from the legal profession for life. As a lawyer commissioned as a notary public, respondent is held to a higher standard of responsibility. His effrontery in notarizing a fictitious or spurious document made a mockery of the legal solemnity of the oath in an acknowledgment. The Court reiterated that a notary who acknowledges a forged document destroys the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and does not deserve to continue as a member of the bar. The Court also considered respondent's harassment of the occupants of the property, including disconnecting services and posting security guards, as acts causing dishonor to the legal profession. Therefore, respondent was found guilty of grave misconduct rendering him unworthy of continuing membership in the legal profession.
Main Doctrine
A notary public who acknowledges a forged document destroys the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and does not deserve to continue as a member of the bar.