Case Digest (A.C. No. 12815)
Facts:
The case involves Edralyn B. Berzola as the complainant and Atty. Marlon O. Baldovino as the respondent. The events leading to the complaint began on January 28, 2002, when Edralyn and Lawrence Antonio were lawfully married in Sta. Ignacia, Tarlac. However, on December 9, 2009, Judge Liberty CastaƱeda of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 67 in Paniqui, Tarlac, declared their marriage void in Civil Case No. 128-P'09. Edralyn later discovered that Lawrence had undergone a psychological examination on February 27, 2009, and that Atty. Baldovino represented him in filing a petition for nullity of marriage on March 26, 2009, citing psychological incapacity as the ground. Notably, Lawrence was absent from the Philippines during this period, having left for Italy as an undocumented worker on August 7, 2007, and only returning on March 14, 2011. Atty. Baldovino also misrepresented Lawrence's residence in the petition and notarized documents that Lawrence allegedly signed ...
Case Digest (A.C. No. 12815)
Facts:
Marriage and Annulment Proceedings:
- Edralyn Berzola and Lawrence Antonio were lawfully married on January 28, 2002, in Sta. Ignacia, Tarlac.
- On December 9, 2009, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 67 of Paniqui, Tarlac, declared their marriage void in Civil Case No. 128-P'09.
Misrepresentation and Fraud:
- Edralyn discovered that Lawrence had submitted himself to a psychological examination on February 27, 2009, and that Atty. Marlon Baldovino represented Lawrence in filing a petition for nullity of marriage on March 26, 2009, on the grounds of psychological incapacity.
- Atty. Baldovino notarized the verification attached to the petition and Lawrence's judicial affidavit, both of which were signed on dates when Lawrence was not in the Philippines. Lawrence had left for Italy on August 7, 2007, and returned only on March 14, 2011.
- Atty. Baldovino also falsely indicated that Lawrence was a resident of Barangay Cabayaoasan, Paniqui, Tarlac, instead of Barangay Cabugbugan, Sta. Ignacia, Tarlac.
- Edralyn's signature was forged to make it appear that she personally received the summons, even though she was not in the Philippines at the time.
- The psychologist who examined Lawrence was not registered with the Professional Regulatory Commission.
Complaint and Evidence:
- Edralyn filed a complaint for falsification and use of falsified documents against Lawrence and Atty. Baldovino.
- Lawrence admitted in his counter-affidavit that he did not participate in the proceedings and relied solely on his counsel's representation.
- Edralyn filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. Baldovino, submitting various pieces of evidence, including affidavits, certifications, and travel records, to prove Lawrence's absence from the Philippines during the relevant period.
Issue:
- Whether Atty. Marlon Baldovino knowingly assisted in the misrepresentation and impersonation of Lawrence Antonio in the annulment proceedings.
- Whether Atty. Baldovino violated the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Rules on Notarial Practice.
- Whether the penalty of disbarment is appropriate for Atty. Baldovino's actions.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court adopted the findings of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and modified the penalty. Atty. Marlon Baldovino was found guilty of gross misconduct and was disbarred from the practice of law. His name was ordered stricken from the Roll of Attorneys, and he was perpetually disqualified from being commissioned as a notary public.
Ratio:
- (Unlock)