Case Summary (A.C. No. 6492)
Complaint and Allegations
Zoreta alleges that Atty. Simpliciano, despite being aware that his notary public commission expired on December 31, 2001, notarized several documents in 2002. The notarized documents included a verification executed by Aurora C. Galvez, affidavits of merit, affidavits of service, and certifications against forum shopping. Each of these documents was submitted to various courts in relation to the ongoing legal matters concerning SPAC.
Evidence of Misconduct
Evidence presented by Zoreta includes certifications from the Clerk of Court of Quezon City, stating that Atty. Simpliciano was not duly commissioned as a notary public for the year 2002. Furthermore, the record indicated that he notarized up to 590 documents before the expiration of his commission. Notably, the acts of notarization during the period of non-commission constitute gross misconduct.
Procedural History
On April 23, 2003, Atty. Simpliciano was ordered by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) to submit his answer to the complaint. However, despite granting him extensions, the respondent failed to file an answer or present evidence to counter the allegations. The lack of response led the investigating commissioner, Lydia A. Navarro, to submit a report recommending disciplinary action against Atty. Simpliciano.
Findings of the IBP and Recommendations
Commissioner Navarro's report concluded that Atty. Simpliciano violated the Notarial Law by notarizing documents without being duly commissioned. The report recommended the revocation of his notary commission and a suspension from the practice of law for three months. The Board of Governors later modified this recommendation, proposing a six-month suspension.
Court’s Analysis and Conclusions
The Court concurred with the findings of the investigating commissioner, affirming that Atty. Simpliciano had notarized documents during a period when he was not authorized. The Court noted that the evidence against him was substantial while he failed to produce a defense, indicating a deliberate indifference to the serious nature of the charges.
Legal Implications and Penalties
The Court emphasized that practicing law is a privilege conditioned upon maintaining professional conduct. Misconduct,
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 6492)
Case Background
- This case involves a disbarment complaint filed against Atty. Heherson Alnor G. Simpliciano for notarizing documents after his notarial commission had expired.
- Complainant Melanio L. Zoreta initiated the complaint following a breach of contract case against Security Pacific Assurance Corporation (SPAC), represented by the respondent, in which several documents were notarized by Simpliciano in 2002.
Allegations Against the Respondent
- Zoreta accused Simpliciano of notarizing multiple documents without a valid commission, which had expired on December 31, 2001.
- The documents in question included:
- A Verification executed by Aurora C. Galvez on February 18, 2002.
- Affidavits of Merit signed by Galvez on the same day.
- Affidavits of Service executed by Legal Assistants of Simpliciano on February 19, 2002, and April 1, 2002.
- Several Certifications and Verifications against Forum Shopping dated between August 16 and August 19, 2002.
- These documents were used in legal proceedings, raising concerns about their validity due to unauthorized notarization.
Procedural History
- The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) ordered Simpliciano to respond to the complaint on April 23, 2003.
- After several extensions requested by Simpliciano’s counsel, he failed to file an answer, leading to a final order from Commissioner Lydia A. Navarro for him to respond.
- Simpliciano did not present any evidence to de