Title
Lopez vs. Lucmayon
Case
A.M. No. MTJ-13-1837
Decision Date
Sep 24, 2014
Judge Rogelio S. Lucmayon found guilty of violating judicial conduct by acting as attorney-in-fact for complainant Conrado Abe Lopez, deceiving him into signing a waiver of rights, and allowing improper notarization, resulting in fines and a stern warning.

Case Summary (A.M. No. MTJ-13-1837)

Antecedent Facts

In a verified complaint filed on December 12, 2011, Conrado Abe Lopez alleged that he inherited a portion of a lot from his adoptive father, Restituto Lopez, at the age of eight. Although his inheritance pertained to Lot No. 1718, he eventually received a part of Lot No. 1696 through an extrajudicial settlement in December 1978. After the death of his adoptive mother, Lopez continued to cultivate the land. In October 2004, he met with Judge Lucmayon, who allegedly deceived him into signing a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) for the sale of Lot No. 1696, which included a "Waiver of Rights," effectively stripping Lopez of ownership. In March 2005, based on this waiver, Judge Lucmayon’s father ordered Lopez to stop cultivating the land. Lopez claimed further acts of dishonesty occurred, notably the exclusion of his name and that of his adoptive mother in a supplemental settlement document, undermining their rights as legal heirs.

Respondent's Defense

In a comment dated March 8, 2012, Judge Lucmayon denied any wrongdoing, asserting that it was Lopez who expressed interest in selling his shares of the property. He contended that Lopez was not legally adopted and thus had no claim to the land. Furthermore, he characterized the complaint as an effort to embarrass him.

Office of the Court Administrator's Report

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) reviewed the complaint and noted its similarities to a criminal complaint for falsification filed by Lopez, which had been dismissed by the Office of the City Prosecutor due to lack of merit. The OCA concluded that Lopez had not sufficiently proven the respondent's administrative liability and recommended the dismissal of the administrative complaint.

Motion for Reconsideration

Lopez sought reconsideration of the dismissal, contending that the OCA had erred in its facts. He reiterated claims regarding the improperly signed SPA and the waiver. The court referred the motion back to the OCA for further examination.

OCA's Revised Recommendation

In a July 23, 2013 memorandum, the OCA re-evaluated the case and recommended that it be re-docketed as a regular administrative matter due to findings of impropriety. Although the initial act of signing the SPAs did not constitute dishonesty, other actions by the respondent—like notarizing documents without Lopez’s presence—were deemed as violations of judicial conduct rules.

Court's Ruling on Violations

The court found Judge Lucmayon liable for violations of Rule 5.06 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which prohibits judges from serving as fiduciaries for individuals outside their immediate family. The court emphasized the importance of judicial neutrality and the risks posed by confl

...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.