Title
Caalim-Verzonilla vs. Pascua
Case
A.C. No. 6655
Decision Date
Oct 11, 2011
Caalim-Verzonilla filed a complaint for disbarment against Atty. Pascua for falsifying documents and evading taxes. The Court found Pascua liable for his actions and imposed a two-year suspension from practice.
A

Case Summary (A.C. No. 6655)

Allegations Against the Respondent

Caalim-Verzonilla asserts that the two deeds, executed on September 15, 2001, contain forged signatures of the heirs, claiming her sister Marivinia was confined in a psychiatric facility at the time of the signing. A certification from the Cagayan Valley Medical Center supports this claim. Additionally, she contends that the Community Tax Certificates (CTCs) used for these deeds were obtained without her or her family's direct involvement, as evidenced by a statement from the Barangay Treasurer.

Respondent's Defense

In his defense, Atty. Pascua acknowledged preparing and notarizing both deeds but denied any wrongdoing. He detailed the process explaining that he was misled by the parties regarding the condition of their signatures and the actual sale price. Pascua argued he was accommodating the parties' request to prepare the second deed with a reduced selling price of P250,000 to alleviate tax burdens. He claimed that all individuals involved confirmed their signatures in his presence prior to notarization.

Findings and Recommendations

The investigation by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) led to the conclusion that Pascua engaged in misconduct detrimental to the legal profession. Specifically, the IBP noted that his actions facilitated fraudulent tax avoidance, describing his failure to uphold legal standards as a breach of his duties as both a lawyer and a notary public. The IBP recommended a three-month suspension, but this was later upgraded to a two-year suspension by the IBP Board of Governors, along with the revocation of his notarial commission.

Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court reaffirmed the IBP's determination of Pascua's administrative liability for his participation in an act designed to defraud the government. The Court noted that by creating a document with untruthful considerations, he directly contravened his obligations under the Code of Professional Responsibility. His decision to notarize a second deed reflecting a false price constituted an unlawful agreement effecti

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.