Title
Cordova vs. Cordova
Case
A.C. No. 3249
Decision Date
Nov 29, 1989
A lawyer abandoned his family, engaged in adulterous relationships, and neglected his duties, leading to indefinite suspension for immorality and misconduct.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 3249)

Complaint and Procedure

Initially, the complaint was an unsworn letter, but the Commission required a verified complaint, which Salvacion submitted on September 27, 1988. On December 1, 1988, the Commission declared Respondent Cordova in default due to his failure to respond to the complaint within the prescribed period. The complainant was directed to present her evidence ex parte, which was rescheduled multiple times. Despite these efforts, the hearings did not take place as Salvacion failed to attend.

Reconciliation and Lack of Follow-Up

On April 6, 1989, the complainant indicated via telegraphic message that she and Respondent Cordova had reconciled. This prompted the Commission to summon both parties for confirmation and explanation, along with a request for a formal motion to dismiss the complaint. However, neither party responded, leading to a lack of further proceedings.

Findings of the IBP Board

The IBP Board of Governors later submitted its report, finding Respondent Cordova guilty of immorality and failure to uphold his responsibilities as a husband and father. The facts revealed that since their marriage on June 6, 1976, Cordova had left his family in 1985 to cohabit with a married woman, Fely G. Holgado. He continued this conduct publicly, failing to support his legitimate family.

Patterns of Misconduct

The report indicated that the Respondent repeatedly exhibited misconduct, neglecting his family's needs while engaging in extramarital relationships. After a reconciliation in 1986, Cordova resumed his immoral behavior, living with another woman, Luisita Magallanes, and taking their child with him, further disregarding his obligations to his legitimate family.

Legal Analysis and Ruling

The Court reviewed the IBP Board's findings, agreeing that even if the reconciliation was genuine, it did not mitigate the seriousness of Cordova’s previous immoral conduct. The Court reiterated that good moral character is a prerequisite for continued membership in the Bar, which is a lasting obligation that supports the integrity of the legal profession.

Suspension and Conditions for Reinstatement

In light of the egregious conduct, which was deemed to be not only a personal failing but also a public affront to the institution of marriage, the Court resolved to indefinitely su

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.