Case Summary (A.C. No. 12552)
Antecedents
In March 2019, a request was made by Princess Ivory Cabaguas Villanueva to Judge Santillan for the issuance of a Certificate of Notarial Act indicating that Atty. Solilapsi had notarized certain documents on behalf of his law office. Upon investigating this request, Judge Santillan uncovered that Atty. Solilapsi had notarized these documents despite his notarial commission having expired in December 2018. Consequently, on March 18, 2019, he issued a memorandum directing Atty. Solilapsi to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against him.
Response from Atty. Solilapsi
In his Letter-Explanation, Atty. Solilapsi contended that the notarization of the subject documents occurred in his absence and without his knowledge or consent. Despite this defense, Judge Santillan found the claim unconvincing given the evidence that Atty. Solilapsi had notarized over 300 documents after his commission expired. Judge Santillan subsequently reported the incident to the Office of the Court Administrator, recommending the filing of an administrative complaint against Atty. Solilapsi for violating notarial regulations.
Court Proceedings and Recommendations
The Office of the Bar Confidant acknowledged the administrative complaint on June 3, 2019, leading to a referral back to Judge Santillan for further investigation. During his inquiry, Judge Santillan confirmed that the Certificate of End of Contract and the Affidavit of Employment were merely two of the over 300 documents notarized after December 2018. He ultimately concluded that Atty. Solilapsi's justification was inadequate and recommended a two-year disqualification from being commissioned as a notary public.
Legal Issues
The central issue at hand was whether Atty. Solilapsi would be held administratively liable for notarizing documents while his commission was expired. In assessing the case, the Court upheld Judge Santillan's findings and reiterated the position that notarization carries significant public interest, thus demanding responsibility from legal practitioners.
Court's Ruling
The Court affirmed the recommendation and adjusted the penalties based on established legal precedents. It emphasized that notarization is not a trivial act and highlights the trust placed in notaries by the public and the legal system. The Court found no merit in Atty. Solilapsi’s defense of ignorance concerning th
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 12552)
Introduction
- The case involves an administrative complaint against Atty. Nepthali P. Solilapsi regarding his notarization of over 300 legal documents despite his notarial commission having expired.
- The complaint was initiated by Judge Adelbert S. Santillan, who served as the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court in Polomolok, South Cotabato.
Antecedents
- In March 2019, Princess Ivory Cabaguas Villanueva requested a Certificate of Notarial Act from Judge Santillan, which revealed that Atty. Solilapsi notarized a Certificate of End of Contract and an Affidavit of Employment.
- Upon investigation, Judge Santillan discovered that Atty. Solilapsi had continued to notarize documents after his notarial commission expired in December 2018.
- Judge Santillan issued Memorandum No. 8 on March 18, 2019, requiring Atty. Solilapsi to explain his actions.
- Atty. Solilapsi, in his Letter-Explanation, claimed that he was unaware of the notarizations, stating that the documents were notarized in his absence and without his knowledge.
Investigation and Findings
- Following the complaint, Judge Santillan reported the matter to the Office of the Court Administrator on March 27, 2019, leading to