Title
IN RE: Ladrera
Case
B.M. No. 135
Decision Date
Jan 29, 1987
Socorro Ke. Ladrera, barred from taking the lawyer's oath in 1955 due to multiple marriages, was later admitted to the Philippine Bar in 1987 after 32 years, citing good faith, moral rehabilitation, and exemplary conduct.

Case Summary (B.M. No. 135)

Relevant Facts

Ladrera's legal troubles commenced shortly after passing the bar, stemming from his marriage to Lucila Casas, which was alleged to have been entered into under false pretenses regarding his marital status. He had previously married Florencia Orticio in 1936, after which multiple complex legal proceedings, including an annulment of his marriage to Casas and a case to declare his first wife presumptively dead, unfolded. Despite his assertions, the litigation continued with accusations of bigamy and immorality, leading to a suspension of his oath-taking as a lawyer.

Historical Overview of Marriages

Ladrera's marital history involved three marriages: first to Florencia Orticio, which produced one child, and then to Lucila C. Casas, with whom he had three children. Following the annulment of his second marriage, he married his third wife, Socorro Santos, resulting in five children. Notably, after marrying Santos, his first wife reappeared and charged him with bigamy, which raised significant legal and moral questions.

Administrative Complaint and Investigative Findings

The administrative complaint filed by Lucila Casas was based on assertions of immorality, primarily due to Ladrera's marriage while his first wife was still alive. An investigation was launched, where it was highlighted that Lucila did not present any testimony, relying instead on documentary evidence. The investigator, however, found that Ladrera acted in good faith believing his first wife was deceased at the time of his subsequent marriages.

Court's Deliberation and Recommendations

An initial recommendation from the investigative report was to allow Ladrera to take the lawyer’s oath, owing to his seemingly good faith actions throughout his marital history. However, despite this, the court ultimately disqualified him from oath-taking due to perceived immorality stemming from his past actions.

Subsequent Developments and Denial of Petitions

Ladrera's repeated petitions over more than three decades for admission to the bar faced continual denial, with the court maintaining that he had not sufficiently demonstrated good moral character requisite for bar admission. Throughout this time, the withdrawal of support from Lucila Casas and various endorsements of Ladrera’s character from respected individuals indicated a gradual shift in perception of his moral standing.

Character Testimonies and Life After Bar Exam

Throughout the years of his exclusion from the bar, Ladrera worked diligently to support his children and eventually garnered various commendations reflecting his decent moral character. Testimonies from numerous community members, government officials, and even from Lucila Casas attested to his reformed life and dedication to his family, supporting the claim that he had moved past his earlier indiscretions.

Final Ruling and Admission to the Philippine Bar

In l

...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.