Case Digest (A.C. No. 13287)
Facts:
The case involves an administrative complaint filed by Flordelina AscaAo (complainant) against Atty. Mario V. Panem (respondent) before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). The complaint, dated June 21, 2023, arose from allegations that Atty. Panem notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale (Deed) in favor of Spouses Severino and Matilde Guillermo, concerning a property owned by AscaAo in Sto. Domingo, Ilocos Sur, without her presence as the seller. AscaAo claimed that upon confronting Atty. Panem about the notarization, he offered to assist her in recovering the property from the Spouses Guillermo. Initially, she accepted his offer; however, she later discovered that Atty. Panem did not accurately represent her account of the facts in the court action he filed on her behalf. Consequently, AscaAo filed the administrative complaint against Atty. Panem for violating the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice and the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR). Specifically, she alleged t...
Case Digest (A.C. No. 13287)
Facts:
1. Background of the Case
Flordelina AscaAo filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Mario V. Panem before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for alleged violations of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (Notarial Rules) and the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR). The complaint stemmed from the notarization of a Deed of Absolute Sale involving AscaAo's property in Sto. Domingo, Ilocos Sur, which she claimed was done without her presence.
2. Allegations Against Atty. Panem
AscaAo alleged that Atty. Panem notarized the Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of Spouses Severino and Matilde Guillermo without her presence as the supposed seller. She further claimed that Atty. Panem failed to:
- Verify her identity through competent evidence.
- Submit his notarial register for the period 2006-2007.
- Represent her interests faithfully in the civil case filed to recover the property, as he allegedly altered her narration of facts in the complaint.
3. Atty. Panem’s Defense
Atty. Panem countered that AscaAo signed the Deed in his presence and presented her community tax certificate as proof of identity. He also claimed that his notarial register and documents were destroyed due to flooding in his law office in July 2006. He denied representing conflicting interests, stating that he only represented AscaAo in the civil case.
4. IBP Findings and Recommendations
The IBP Investigating Commissioner found Atty. Panem guilty of violating the Notarial Rules and the CPR and recommended disbarment. However, the IBP Board of Governors modified the penalty to:
- Two-year suspension from the practice of law.
- Immediate revocation of his notarial commission.
- Disqualification from reappointment as a notary public for two years.
Issue:
The primary issue for resolution is whether Atty. Panem should be held administratively liable for:
- Violating the Notarial Rules by notarizing the Deed without AscaAo’s presence and failing to verify her identity.
- Failing to submit his notarial register and reports.
- Representing conflicting interests and making untruthful statements in court pleadings.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)