[A.C. No. 4545. February 5, 2014.] CARLITO ANG, compla!a!", #$. ATT%. ATT%. &A'() &O)(*+ G*ANA, G*ANA, re$po!-e!". re$po!-e! ". (CI)ION
VILLARAMA, JR., J p: Before us is a petition for review under Rule 139-B, e!tion 1" #!$ of t%e Rules of &ourt assailin' Resolution (os. )VII-"**+-11 1 and )VIII-"**-9 " of t%e Board of /overnors of t%e Inte'rated Bar of t%e 0%ilippines #IB0$. %e IB0 Board of /overnors found respondent Att2. Jaes Josep% /upana adinistrativel2 lia4le and iposed on %i t%e penalt2 of suspension for one one 2ear ear fro fro t%e t%e pra! pra!ti ti!e !e of law law and and t%e t%e revo revo!a !ati tion on of %is %is nota notari rial al !o !ois issi sion on and and dis5ualifi!ation fro reappointent as notar2 pu4li! for two 2ears. %e !ase steed fro an affidavit-!oplaint 3 filed 42 !oplainant &arlito An' a'ainst respondent. An' alle'ed t%at on Ma2 31, 1991, %e and t%e ot%er %eirs of t%e late &andelaria Ma'pa2o, Ma'pa2o, nael2 0urifi!a!ion 0urifi!a!ion 6iaante 6iaante and 7illia 7illia Ma'pa2o, e8e!uted e8e!uted an 8tra-udi 8tra-udi!ial !ial 6e!laration of ;eirs and 0artition involvin' Lot (o. "*-B-"-B w%i!% %ad an area of ,"+ s5uare eters and was !overed 42 ransfer &ertifi!ate of itle #&$ (o. #-""*9$-33. ;e was 'iven %is s%are of ",**3 s5uare eters desi'nated as Lot (o. "*-B-"-B-, to'et%er wit% all t%e iproveents t%ereon. + ;owever, w%en %e tried to se!ure a & in %is nae, %e found out t%at said & (o. #-""*9$-33 %ad alread2 4een !an!elled and in lieu t%ereof, new &s %ad 4een issued in t%e naes of 7illia Ma'pa2o, Antonio 6iaante, 0atri!ia 6iaante, Lolita 6. &an5ue, /re'orio 6iaante, Jr. and
and 6eed of A4solute ale t%at led to t%e transfer and issuan!e of t%e new &s. An' pointed out t%at t%e 6eed of A4solute ale w%i!% was alle'edl2 e8e!uted 42 &andelaria Ma'pa2o on April 1>, 199, was antedated and &andelaria Ma'pa2o?s si'nature was for'ed as !learl2 s%own 42 t%e &ertifi!ation 9 issued 42 t%e @ffi!e of t%e &ler of &ourt of t%e Re'ional rial &ourt #R&$ of &e4u. , Boo (o. )II, eries of 199 of respondent?s (otarial Report indu4ita4l2 s%owed t%at 6o!. (o. 11 did not refer to t%e 6eed of A4solute ale, 4ut to an affidavit. 1* As to t%e Affidavit of Loss, w%i!% was alle'edl2 e8e!uted 42 t%e late &andelaria Ma'pa2o on April "9, 199, it !ould not %ave 4een e8e!uted 42 %er as s%e died 11 t%ree 2ears prior to t%e e8e!ution of t%e said affidavit affidavit of loss. An' furt%er alle'ed t%at on epte4er "", 199+, respondent ade %iself t%e attorne2-in-fa!t of 7illia Ma'pa2o, Antonio 6iaante, 0atri!ia 6iaante, Lolita &an5ue, /re'orio 6iaante, Jr. and
An' !oplained t%at t%e sale was ade even t%ou'% a !ivil !ase involvin' t%e said par!el of land was pendin' 4efore t%e R& of Mandaue &it2, &e4u. In %is &oent, 1 respondent denied an2 wron'doin' and ar'ued t%at An' is erel2 usin' t%e present adinistrative !oplaint as a tool to for!e t%e defendants in a pendin' !ivil !ase and t%eir !ounsel, %erein respondent, to a!!ede to %is wis%es. Respondent averred t%at An' %ad filed &ivil &ase (o. Man-""*" 4efore Bran!% ++ of t%e Mandaue &it2 R&. ;e an!%ored %is !lai on t%e 8tra-udi!ial 6e!laration of ;eirs and 0artition and sou'%t to annul t%e deed of sale and pra2ed for re!onve2an!e of t%e su4e!t par!el of land. 6urin' t%e pre-trial !onferen!e in &ivil &ase (o. Man-""*", An' aditted t%at %e is not an %eir of t%e late &andelaria Ma'pa2o 4ut insisted on %is !lai for a s%are of t%e lot 4e!ause %e is alle'edl2 t%e son of t%e late Isaias An', t%e !oon-law %us4and of &andelaria Ma'pa2o. Be!ause of %is adission, t%e noti!e of lis pendens annotated in t%e four !ertifi!ates of title of t%e land in 5uestion were ordered !an!elled and t%e land effe!tivel2 4e!ae availa4le for disposition. An' sou'%t re!onsideration of t%e order, 4ut a !oproise was rea!%ed t%at onl2 one & #& (o. 3"$ will 4e annotated wit% a noti!e of lis pendens. Respondent surised t%at t%ese developents in &ivil &ase (o. Man""*" eant t%at An' would lose %is !ase so An' resorted to t%e filin' of t%e present adinistrative !oplaint. %us, respondent pra2ed for t%e disissal of t%e !ase for 4ein' devoid of an2 fa!tual or le'al 4asis, or in t%e alternative, %oldin' resolution of t%e instant !ase in a4e2an!e pendin' resolution of &ivil &ase (o. Man-""*" alle'edl2 4e!ause t%e issues in t%e present adinistrative !ase are siilar to t%e issues or su4e!t atters involved in said !ivil !ase. Investi'atin' &oissioner L2dia A. (avarro of t%e IB0 &oission on Bar 6is!ipline, to w%o t%e !ase was referred for investi'ation, report and re!oendation, su4itted %er Report and Re!oendation 1+ findin' respondent adinistrativel2 lia4le. %e re!oended t%at respondent 4e suspended fro t%e pra!ti!e of law for t%ree ont%s. %e %eld t%at respondent !oitted an unet%i!al a!t w%en %e allowed %iself to 4e an instruent in t%e disposal of t%e su4e!t propert2 t%rou'% a deed of sale e8e!uted 4etween %i as attorne2-in-fa!t of %is !lient and Li i o Mer!antile &o. despite %is nowled'e t%at said propert2 is t%e su4e!t of a pendin' liti'ation 4efore t%e R& of Mandaue &it2, &e4u. %e Investi'atin' &oissioner additionall2 found t%at respondent Cdele'ated t%e notarial fun!tions to t%e !leri!al staff of t%eir offi!e 4efore 4ein' 4rou'%t to %i for %is si'nature.C %is, a!!ordin' to t%e !oissioner, Cust %ave 4een t%e reason for t%e for'ed si'natures of t%e parties in t%e 5uestioned do!uent. . . as well as t%e erroneous entr2 in %is notarial re'ister. . . .C 1 (onet%eless, t%e Investi'atin' &oissioner erel2 reinded respondent to 4e ore !autious in t%e perforan!e of %is duties as re'ards %is infra!tion of %is notarial duties. %e %eld, Respondent s%ould %ave 4een ore !autious in %is dut2 as notar2 pu4li! w%i!% re5uires t%at t%e part2 su4s!ri4in' to t%e aut%enti!it2 of t%e do!uent s%ould personall2 appear and si'n t%e sae 4efore respondent?s a!tual presen!e. As su!% notar2 pu4li! respondent s%ould not dele'ate to an2 un5ualified person t%e perforan!e of an2 tas w%i!% 42 law a2 onl2 4e perfored 42 a e4er of t%e 4ar in a!!ordan!e wit% Rule 9.*1 1> of t%e &ode of 0rofessional Responsi4ilit2.
@n (ove4er 1", "**+, t%e Board of /overnors of t%e IB0 issued Resolution (o. )VII-"**+11, 19 adoptin' t%e findin's of t%e Investi'atin' &oissioner 4ut odif2in' t%e re!oended penalt2. Instead of suspension for t%ree ont%s, t%e Board re!oended t%e penalt2 of suspension fro t%e pra!ti!e of law for one 2ear and revo!ation of respondent?s notarial !oission and dis5ualifi!ation fro reappointent as notar2 pu4li! for two 2ears. Respondent filed a otion for re!onsideration, "* ar'uin' t%at it was neit%er ille'al nor unet%i!al for a law2er to a!!ept appointent as attorne2-in-fa!t of a !lient to sell a propert2 involved in a pendin' liti'ation and to a!t as su!%. ;e furt%er !ontended t%at 'rantin' t%at %is a!t was unet%i!al, t%e odified penalt2 was evidentl2 too %ars% and e8treel2 e8!essive !onsiderin' t%at t%e a!t !oplained of was not unlawful and done wit%out ali!e. @n 6e!e4er 11, "**, t%e IB0 Board of /overnors adopted Resolution (o. )VIII-"**-9 "1 den2in' respondent?s otion for re!onsideration and affirin' Resolution (o. )VII-"**+-11. ;en!e, t%is petition for review. Respondent reiterates t%at 4ein' !oissioned 42 %is own !lients to sell a portion of a par!el of land, part of w%i!% is involved in liti'ation, is not per se ille'al or unet%i!al. A!!ordin' to %i, %is !lients 'ot %is %elp to sell part of t%e land and 4e!ause t%e2 were residin' in different provin!es, t%e2 e8e!uted a pe!ial 0ower of Attorne2 in %is favor. 7e affir t%e resolution of t%e IB0 Board of /overnors findin' respondent adinistrativel2 lia4le. After reviewin' t%e re!ords of t%e !ase, t%e &ourt finds t%at respondent did not a!t unet%i!all2 w%en %e sold t%e propert2 in dispute as t%e sellers? attorne2-in-fa!t 4e!ause t%ere was no ore noti!e of lis pendens annotated on t%e parti!ular lot sold. Liewise, t%e &ourt finds no suffi!ient eviden!e to s%ow t%at t%e 6eed of A4solute ale e8e!uted 42 &andelaria Ma'pa2o on April 1>, 199 was antedated. ;owever, t%e &ourt finds respondent adinistrativel2 lia4le for violation of %is notarial duties w%en %e failed to re5uire t%e personal presen!e of &andelaria Ma'pa2o w%en %e notari=ed t%e Affidavit of Loss w%i!% &andelaria alle'edl2 e8e!uted on April "9, 199. e!tion 1 of 0u4li! A!t (o. "1*3, ot%erwise nown as t%e (otarial Law, e8pli!itl2 provides: e!. 1. . . . #a$ %e a!nowled'ent s%all 4e ade 4efore a notar2 pu4li! or an offi!er dul2 aut%ori=ed 42 law of t%e !ountr2 to tae a!nowled'ents of instruents or do!uents in t%e pla!e w%ere t%e a!t is done. %e notar2 pu4li! or t%e offi!er tain' t%e a!nowled'ent s%all !ertif2 t%at t%e person a!nowled'in' t%e instruent or do!uent is nown to %i and t%at %e is t%e sae person w%o e8e!uted it, and a!nowled'ed t%at t%e sae is %is free a!t and deed. %e !ertifi!ate
s%all 4e ade under %is offi!ial seal, if %e is 42 law re5uired to eep a seal, and if not, %is !ertifi!ate s%all so state. It devolves upon respondent to a!t wit% due !are and dili'en!e in stapin' fiat on t%e 5uestioned do!uents. Respondent?s failure to perfor %is dut2 as a notar2 pu4li! resulted in underinin' t%e inte'rit2 of a notar2 pu4li! and in de'radin' t%e fun!tion of notari=ation. ;en!e, %e s%ould 4e lia4le for %is infra!tion, not onl2 as a notar 2 pu4li! 4ut also as a law2er. As a law2er !oissioned as notar2 pu4li!, respondent is andated to su4s!ri4e to t%e sa!red duties appertainin' to %is offi!e, su!% duties 4ein' di!tated 42 pu4li! poli!2 ipressed wit% pu4li! interest.
respondent and failin' t%erein, %e ust now a!!ept t%e !oensurate !onse5uen!es of %is professional indis!retion. " As t%e &ourt %as %eld in
