THIRD DIVISION
[A.C. No. 10264. April 3, 2017.]
MINERVA T. CORREA, complainant,vs. ATTY. GABRIEL QUEMADO, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedApril 3, 2017, which reads as follows:
"A.C. No. 10264 [Formerly CBD Case No. 05-1496] (Minerva T. Correa v. Atty. Gabriel Quemado). — Before this Court is a Complaint 1 dated May 18, 2005 filed by Complainant Minerva T. Correa, seeking the disbarment of Respondent Atty. Gabriel Quemado for a violation of the Notarial Law.
The complainant mainly alleged that the respondent notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale and made it appear that she has personally appeared before the respondent as notary public and acknowledged under oath the said document. She further claimed that the Community Tax Certificate indicated in the said document does not belong to her.
Despite being directed to file an Answer, respondent failed to do so, hence, he was declared as having waived his rights to further participate in the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) proceedings.
On April 26, 2009, the Investigating Commissioner submitted a Report 2 finding the respondent guilty of violating the Rules on Notarial Practice and recommending the penalty of one-year suspension as a notary public and one-year suspension from the practice of law. Specifically, the Investigating Commissioner found that a comparison of complainant's signature appearing in her pleadings against her signature in the alleged Deed of Absolute Sale showed distinctive dissimilarities.
In a Resolution 3 dated April 15, 2013 the IBP Board of Governors modified the recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner by revoking respondent's notarial commission for two years and suspending him from the practice of law for six months.
On November 18, 2013, the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline transmitted the notice of the resolution and the case records to this Court for final action pursuant to Rule 139-B. 4 As per verification, neither party had filed a motion for reconsideration or a petition for review thereafter.
The Court finds it fitting to sustain the IBP's findings and recommendation since the attendant facts of the case show substantial evidence to support respondent's delinquency.
The records of the case and the evidence presented clearly showed that the respondent violated not only the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, but also his oath as a lawyer and the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
The Court has reiterated that lawyers commissioned as notaries public must require the affiants to personally appear before them as provided in Section 2 (b) 5 of Rule IV of the Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004.
Here, it was established that respondent notarized the subject Deed of Sale without the presence of affiant complainant before him as required by the Rules. More so, the respondent also violated the CPR by notarizing the questioned deed since he engaged in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. 6
The Court also took note of the fact that the respondent did not bother to answer the complaint against him and participate in the proceedings below despite having received all the orders and notices that were sent to him, as duly certified by the postal office.
In sum, respondent's failure to perform his duty as a notary public undermines the integrity of a notary public and degrades the function of notarization. Consequently, he is liable for such negligence, not only as a notary public but also as a lawyer.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court RESOLVES to:
1. REVOKE respondent Atty. Gabriel Quemado's notarial commission for breach of the Notarial Law and DISQUALIFY him from reappointment as notary public for a period of two years; and
2. SUSPEND him from the practice of law for a period of six months effective immediately for violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility. He is further WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar acts shall be dealt with more severely.
Let copies of this Resolution be furnished to the Office of the Bar Confidant, to be appended to respondent's personal record as attorney. Likewise, copies shall be furnished to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and all courts in the country for their information and guidance. CAIHTE
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 2-8.
2.Id. at 55-57.
3.Id. at 53-54.
4.Id. at 52.
5. SEC. 2. Prohibitions. — x x x
(b) A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person involved as signatory to the instrument or document —
(1) is not in the notary's presence personally at the time of the notarization; and
(2) is not personally known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules.
6. Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.