Ang v. Gupana

FACTS: Ang filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Gupana. Ang alleged that he and the other heirs of the late Candelaria Magpayo executed an Extra-judicial Declaration of Heirs and Partition wherein he was given a share. However, when he tried to secure a TCT in his name, he found out that the TCT had already been cancelled and in lieu thereof, new TCTs.

Ang alleged that there is reasonable ground to believe that respondent had a direct participation in the commission of forgeries and falsifications because he was the one who prepared and notarized the Affidavit of Loss and Deed of Absolute Sale that led to the transfer and issuance of the new TCTs. Respondent denied any wrongdoing. Ang admitted that he is not an heir of the late Candelaria Magpayo but insisted on his claim for a share of the lot because he is allegedly the son of the late Isaias Ang, the common-law husband of Candelaria Magpayo. Because of his admission, the notice of lis pendens annotated in the four certificates of title of the land in question were ordered cancelled and the land effectively became available for disposition.

ISSUE: Whether respondent is administratively liable. YES

HELD: The Court finds that respondent did not act unethically when he sold the property in dispute as the sellers’ attorney-in-fact because there was no more notice of lis pendens annotated on the particular lot sold. Likewise, the Court finds no sufficient evidence to show that the Deed of Absolute Sale executed by Candelaria Magpayo was antedated.

However, the Court finds respondent administratively liable for violation of his notarial duties when he failed to require the personal presence of Candelaria Magpayo when he notarized the Affidavit of Loss. 

Respondent likewise violated Rule 9.01, Canon 9, of the CPR. Respondent averred that it had been his consistent practice to course through clerical staff documents to be notarized. Upon referral, said clerical staff investigates whether the documents are complete as to the fundamental requirements and inquires as to the identity of the individual signatories thereto. If everything is in order, they ask the parties to sign the documents and forward them to him and he again inquires about the identities of the parties before affixing his notarial signature. It is also his clerical staff who records entries in his notarial report.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION: WHEREFORE, Atty. James Joseph Gupana is found administratively liable for misconduct and is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for one year. Further, his notarial commission, if any, is REVOKED and he is disqualified from reappointment as Notary Public for a period of two years, with a stem warning that repetition of the same or similar conduct in the future will be dealt with more severely.