Case Digest (A.C. No. 10249)
Facts:
Virgilio C. Rigon, Jr. v. Atty. Eric P. Subia, A.C. No. 10249, September 07, 2020, Supreme Court Second Division, Delos Santos, J., writing for the Court. The Second Division's decision was concurred in by Perlas-Bernabe, Senior Associate Justice, and Hernando, JJ.; Inting, J., and Baltazar-Padilla, J., were on leave.Complainant Virgilio Cayetano Rigon, Jr. (Virgilio, Jr.), authorized by a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) from the heirs of Placido Rigon, filed an Affidavit Complaint dated November 11, 2013 seeking the disbarment of Atty. Eric P. Subia for alleged violations of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. Virgilio, Jr. alleged that a Deed of Absolute Sale dated June 24, 2011 (the subject Deed), notarized before Atty. Subia, purportedly conveyed a portion of Placido's land to Pete Gerald L. Javier although Placido and his wife Telesfora had died decades earlier (Placido in 1940; Telesfora in 1961). The deed bore Atty. Subia’s signature and notarial seal and was said to be docketed as Doc. No. 20, Page No. 04, Book No. 06, Series of 2011 in his notarial register.
Verification from the Office of the Clerk of Court (OCC) of Cauayan City showed that Doc. No. 20, Page 04, Book 06 was actually a Joint Affidavit of Two Disinterested Persons and not the subject Deed. The subject Deed nevertheless effected a transfer reflected in a new title (TCT No. T-397909). The heirs authorized Virgilio, Jr. to file administrative/disbarment charges against Atty. Subia for notarizing a deed involving deceased vendors and lacking two required witnesses.
Atty. Subia filed a Comment (March 17, 2014) denying authorship and alleging forgery and falsification of his signature; the OCC certification supported that Doc. No. 20 pertained to a different document. The Supreme Court referred the complaint to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation (Resolution, July 7, 2014). Virgilio, Jr. died on August 13, 2014; his father informed the Court and continued to pursue the matter. Atty. Subia later argued before the IBP-CBD that the complainant’s death and defects in the SPA mandated dismissal.
The IBP-CBD, through Commissioner Ramsey M. Quijano, found Atty. Subia liable for violating the Notarial Rules, concluding that mere denial without clear proof of forgery demonstrated negligence given the presence of the notary seal and signature on the document. The IBP Board of Governors adopted the CBD recommendation and recommended rev...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Does the death of the complainant or defects in the Special Power of Attorney bar the disciplinary proceedings against Atty. Subia?
- Did Atty. Subia violate the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (specifically Rule II, Secs. 6 and 8; Rule IV, Secs. 2 and 5(b)) by notarizing the subject Deed or otherwise failing in his d...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)