Dizon v. Cabucana
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Complainant Licerio Dizon filed a petition for disbarment against Atty. Marcelino Cabucana, Jr. for falsification of public document and uttering grave threats. Complainant alleged that Atty. Cabucana notarized a compromise agreement in Civil Case No. 1-689 without the signatories appearing before him. The signatories later testified that they signed the document in court but not in the presence of Atty. Cabucana as Notary Public. Complainant further alleged that Atty. Cabucana uttered grave threats against him after a hearing. Procedural History: The Investigating Commissioner of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) found Atty. Cabucana violated Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and recommended suspension. The IBP Board of Governors adopted this with modification, suspending Atty. Cabucana for six months. On reconsideration, the IBP Board modified its resolution further, suspending him for one month and disqualifying him from reappointment as notary public for one year. The Petition: The complainant prayed for the disbarment of Atty. Cabucana for falsification of public document and violation of the Notarial Law, and for the utterance of grave threats.
Issue(s)
Whether Atty. Cabucana violated the Notarial Law and the Code of Professional Responsibility in notarizing the compromise agreement without the personal appearance of the signatories. Whether Atty. Cabucana uttered grave threats against the complainant.
Ruling
The Court found respondent Atty. Marcelino Cabucana, Jr. GUILTY of violating Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Accordingly, the Court SUSPENDED him from the practice of law for three (3) months, REVOKED his incumbent notarial commission, if any, and PROHIBITED him from being commissioned as a notary public for two (2) years, effective immediately, with a stern WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar offense shall be dealt with more severely.
Ratio Decidendi
On the violation of the Notarial Law and Code of Professional Responsibility: The Court affirmed that Atty. Cabucana violated Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Court emphasized that Section 1 of Public Act No. 2103, the Notarial Law, requires that an acknowledgment be taken before a notary public who certifies that the person acknowledging the instrument is known to him and is the same person who executed it. Furthermore, Section 2(b) of Rule IV of the Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004 explicitly states that a notary public shall not perform a notarial act if the signatory is not personally present at the time of notarization and not personally known to the notary or identified through competent evidence. As a notary public, Atty. Cabucana had the duty to ensure the personal appearance of the signatories to verify the genuineness of their signatures and to ascertain that the document was their free and voluntary act. His failure to do so constituted a violation of his obligations as a notary public and a breach of the ethical standards expected of a member of the legal profession. The Court found that the signatories themselves testified that they signed the compromise agreement in court but not in the presence of Atty. Cabucana as Notary Public, directly contradicting the notarial certificate. This established irregularity in the notarization process led to undue delay in the resolution of the civil case, causing damage and injury to the complainant, who was a prospective buyer of the property subject of the compromise agreement. The Court found the evidence sufficient to establish the violation. On the alleged grave threats: The Court did not explicitly rule on the allegation of grave threats in the dispositive portion, focusing its resolution on the notarial misconduct. However, the initial petition included this allegation, and the Court's finding of guilt for violating Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility implies a focus on the more substantial and provable charge related to the practice of law.
Main Doctrine
A notary public violates the Notarial Law and the Code of Professional Responsibility when notarizing a document without the personal appearance of the signatories, as this undermines the verification of the document's genuineness and the voluntary execution thereof.