A.C. No. 3249 - NOVEMBER 1989 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE A.C. No. 3249November 29, 1989Salvacion Delizo Cordova vs. Laurence D. Cordova G.R. No. 51655 November 29, 1989Vicente Del Rosario vs. Julio Bansil G.R. No. 72199November 29, 1989Adelino R. Montanez vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 82304November 29, 1989Honorato M. Fruto vs. Rainero O. Reyes G.R. No. L-34836November 29, 1989Linda Taruc vs. Hon. Vicente G. Ericta G.R. No. L-48974 November 29, 1989Francisco Mascarina, et al, vs. Eastern Quezon College A.C. No. 1334November 28, 1989Rosario Delos Reyes vs. Jose B. Aznar G.R. No. 79351 November 28, 1989Development Bank of the Philippines vs. Secretary of Labor G.R. No. 85141 November 28, 1989Filipino Merchants Insurance Company vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 86025 November 28, 1989Rodolfo R. Aquino vs. Deodoro J. Sison G.R. Nos. 46898-99 November 28, 1989Philippine National Bank vs. Rustico De Los Reyes G.R. No. 60690 November 24,1989Virginia Jorge vs. Francisco Z. Consolacion G.R. No. 79564November 24, 1989Aurora B. Camacho vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 80405November 24, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Arnel Mitra G.R. No. 38984 November 24, 1989Macario D. Embuscado vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 79886November 22, 1989Qualitrans Limousine Service vs. Royal Class Limousine Service G.R. No. 88725 November 22, 1989Asian Transmission Corporation vs. National Labor Relations Commission G.R. Nos. 30475-76 November 22, 1989Gen. Insurance & Surety Corporation vs. Union Insurance Society of Canton G.R. Nos. 48468-69 November 22, 1989Orlando Primero vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 61466 November 22, 1989Enrique T. Jocson vs. Alfonso Baguio G.R. No. 69450 November 22, 1989Eastern Assurance & Surety Corporation vs. Intermediate Appellate Court G.R. No. 45061 November 20, 1989Director of Lands vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 83286 November 16, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Fernando T. Hernandez G.R. No. 83828 November 16, 1989Leonor Magdangal vs. City of Olongapo G.R. No. 84628November 16, 1989Heirs of Ildefonso Coscolluela, Sr. vs. Rico General Insurance Corporation G.R. No. 69122 November 16, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Pedro T. Olapani, et al. A.C. No. 2974November 15, 1989Rogelio A. Miranda vs. Orlando A. Rayos G.R. No. 71159November 15, 1989City of Manila, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. 76531November 15, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo B. Salita G.R. No. 80486 November 15, 1989Salvador Esmilla, et al. vs. Federico Alvarez, et al. G.R. No. 84484November 15, 1989Insular Life Assurance Company vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 88379November 15, 1989Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. Nos. 90273-75 November 15, 1989 Finman General Assurance Corporation vs. William Inocencio, et al. G.R. No. 39632 November 15, 1989Apolonio G. Maleniza vs. Commission on Audit G.R. No. 63396November 15, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Arnulfo Liston, et al. G.R. No. 64414November 15, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Sabino Veronas, et al. G.R. Nos. 83380-81 November 15, 1989Makati Haberdashery, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 83870 November 14, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Reynato Asuncion, et al. G.R. No. 84951November 14, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Susana M. Napat-A G.R. No. 49668November 14, 1989Policarpio Galicia, et al. vs. Wenceslao M. Polo, et al. G.R. No. 60490November 14, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Sergio Serenio G.R. No. 79050-51November 14, 1989Pantranco North Express, Inc. vs. Maricar Bascos Baesa G.R. No. 79403 November 13, 1989Emeterio M. Mozar vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. Nos. 82238-42 November 13, 1989Antonio T. Guerrero, et al. vs. Adriano R. Villamor G.R. No. 83664 November 13, 1989Renato S. Santos vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. Nos. 53926-29 November 13, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Manuel Mateo, Jr., et al. G.R. No. 65017 November 13, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Stalin P. Guevarra G.R. No. 66944 November 13, 1989Alliance Tobacco Corporation Inc. vs. Philippines Virginia Tobacco Admnistration, et al. G.R. No. 75041 November 13, 1989Rosa N. Edra, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. 89651 November 10, 1989Datu Firdausi I.Y. Abbas, et al. vs. Commission on Elections, et al. G.R. No. 72323 November 9, 1989Manuel Villar, et al. vs. Philippines Deposit Insurance Corporation, et al. G.R. No. 76193 November 9, 1989United Feature Syndicate, Inc. vs. Munsingwear Co. G.R. No. 82805 November 9, 1989Briad Agro Development Corporation vs. Dionisio Dela Cerna, et al. G.R. No. 86819 November 9, 1989Adamson Univ. vs. Adamson Univ. Fac. & Emp. Asso., et al. G.R. No. 74817 November 8, 1989Simeon Estoesta Sr., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 78051 November 8, 1989Isagani M. Jungco vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 78413 November 8, 1989Cagayan Valley Enterprises, Inc., vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 80796November 8, 1989Province of Camarines Norte vs. Province of Quezon G.R. No. 82180November 8, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Haide De Luna G.R. No. 48518November 8, 1989Gregorio Santiago vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 55750 November 8, 1989Ruben Melgar, et al. vs. Carlos R. Buenviaje, et al. G.R. No. 82895 November 7, 1989Llora Motors, Inc., et al. vs. Franklin Drilon, et al. G.R. Nos. 68580-81 November 7, 1989Agustin T. Dioquino, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. 71871 November 6, 1989Teodoro M. Hernandez vs. Commission on Audit G.R. No. 74431 November 6, 1989Purita Miranda Vestil, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. 79743 November 6, 1989Maria Pilar Marquez vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 84458November 6, 1989Aboitiz Shipping Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 84497 November 6, 1989Alfonso Escovilla, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 84979 November 6, 1989Stronghold Insurance Company Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 85085 November 6, 1989Associated Labor Unions vs. Pura Ferrer-Calleja, et al. G.R. No. 50654November 6, 1989Rudy Gleo Armigos vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 53401November 6, 1989Ilocos Norte Electric Company vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 57876 November 6, 1989Francisca Puzon Gaerlan vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 60159November 6, 1989P/Cpl. Fausto Andal vs. Sandiganbayan, et al. G.R. No. 63462 November 6, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Jose Pirreras, et al. G.R. Nos. 74989-90 November 6, 1989Joel B. Caes vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. Nos. 76019-20 November 6, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Martin Bruca G.R. Nos. 83938-40 November 6, 1989People of the Philippines vs. Henry B. Basilla, et al. G.R. Nos. 86540-41November 6, 1989Mantruste Systems, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. Nos. 89095 & 89555 November 6, 1989Sixto P. Crisostomo vs. Securities and Exchange Commission, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. Salvacion Delizo Cordova vs. Laurence D. CordovaVicente Del Rosario vs. Julio BansilAdelino R. Montanez vs. People of the PhilippinesHonorato M. Fruto vs. Rainero O. ReyesLinda Taruc vs. Hon. Vicente G. ErictaFrancisco Mascarina, et al, vs. Eastern Quezon CollegeRosario Delos Reyes vs. Jose B. AznarDevelopment Bank of the Philippines vs. Secretary of LaborFilipino Merchants Insurance Company vs. Court of AppealsRodolfo R. Aquino vs. Deodoro J. SisonPhilippine National Bank vs. Rustico De Los ReyesVirginia Jorge vs. Francisco Z. ConsolacionAurora B. Camacho vs. Court of AppealsPeople of the Philippines vs. Arnel MitraMacario D. Embuscado vs. People of the PhilippinesQualitrans Limousine Service vs. Royal Class Limousine ServiceAsian Transmission Corporation vs. National Labor Relations CommissionGen. Insurance & Surety Corporation vs. Union Insurance Society of CantonOrlando Primero vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Enrique T. Jocson vs. Alfonso BaguioEastern Assurance & Surety Corporation vs. Intermediate Appellate CourtDirector of Lands vs. Court of AppealsPeople of the Philippines vs. Fernando T. HernandezLeonor Magdangal vs. City of OlongapoHeirs of Ildefonso Coscolluela, Sr. vs. Rico General Insurance CorporationPeople of the Philippines vs. Pedro T. Olapani, et al.Rogelio A. Miranda vs. Orlando A. RayosCity of Manila, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo B. SalitaSalvador Esmilla, et al. vs. Federico Alvarez, et al.Insular Life Assurance Company vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Finman General Assurance Corporation vs. William Inocencio, et al.Apolonio G. Maleniza vs. Commission on AuditPeople of the Philippines vs. Arnulfo Liston, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Sabino Veronas, et al.Makati Haberdashery, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Reynato Asuncion, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Susana M. Napat-APolicarpio Galicia, et al. vs. Wenceslao M. Polo, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Sergio SerenioPantranco North Express, Inc. vs. Maricar Bascos BaesaEmeterio M. Mozar vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Antonio T. Guerrero, et al. vs. Adriano R. VillamorRenato S. Santos vs. Court of Appeals, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Manuel Mateo, Jr., et al.People of the Philippines vs. Stalin P. GuevarraAlliance Tobacco Corporation Inc. vs. Philippines Virginia Tobacco Admnistration, et al.Rosa N. Edra, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.Datu Firdausi I.Y. Abbas, et al. vs. Commission on Elections, et al.Manuel Villar, et al. vs. Philippines Deposit Insurance Corporation, et al.United Feature Syndicate, Inc. vs. Munsingwear Co.Briad Agro Development Corporation vs. Dionisio Dela Cerna, et al.Adamson Univ. vs. Adamson Univ. Fac. & Emp. Asso., et al.Simeon Estoesta Sr., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Isagani M. Jungco vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Cagayan Valley Enterprises, Inc., vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Province of Camarines Norte vs. Province of QuezonPeople of the Philippines vs. Haide De LunaGregorio Santiago vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Ruben Melgar, et al. vs. Carlos R. Buenviaje, et al.Llora Motors, Inc., et al. vs. Franklin Drilon, et al.Agustin T. Dioquino, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.Teodoro M. Hernandez vs. Commission on AuditPurita Miranda Vestil, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.Maria Pilar Marquez vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Aboitiz Shipping Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Alfonso Escovilla, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Stronghold Insurance Company Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Associated Labor Unions vs. Pura Ferrer-Calleja, et al.Rudy Gleo Armigos vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Ilocos Norte Electric Company vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Francisca Puzon Gaerlan vs. Court of Appeals, et al.P/Cpl. Fausto Andal vs. Sandiganbayan, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Jose Pirreras, et al.Joel B. Caes vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Martin BrucaPeople of the Philippines vs. Henry B. Basilla, et al.Mantruste Systems, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Sixto P. Crisostomo vs. Securities and Exchange Commission, et al.The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Manila
EN BANC
A.C. No. 3249 November 29, 1989
SALVACION DELIZO CORDOVA,complainant,
vs.
ATTY. LAURENCE D. CORDOVA,respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
PER CURIAM:
In an unsworn letter-complaint dated 14 April 1988 addressed to then Mr. Chief Justice Claudio Teehankee, complainant Salvacion Delizo charged her husband, Atty. Laurence D. Cordova, with immorality and acts unbecoming a member of the Bar. The letter-complaint was forwarded by the Court to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Commission on Bar Discipline ("Commission"), for investigation, report and recommendation.
The Commission, before acting on the complaint, required complainant to submit a verified complaint within ten (10) days from notice. Complainant complied and submitted to the Commission on 27 September 1988 a revised and verified version of her long and detailed complaint against her husband charging him with immorality and acts unbecoming a member of the Bar.
In an Order of the Commission dated 1 December 1988, respondent was declared in default for failure to file an answer to the complaint within fifteen (15) days from notice.ℒαwρhi৷The same Order required complainant to submit before the Commission her evidenceex parte,on 16 December 1988. Upon the telegraphic request of complainant for the resetting of the 16 December 1988 hearing, the Commission scheduled another hearing on 25 January 1989. The hearing scheduled for 25 January 1989 was rescheduled two (2) more times-first, for 25 February 1989 and second, for 10 and 11 April 1989. The hearings never took place as complainant failed to appear. Respondent Cordova never moved to set aside the order of default, even though notices of the hearings scheduled were sent to him.
In a telegraphic message dated 6 April 1989, complainant informed the Commission that she and her husband had already "reconciled". In an order dated 17 April 1989, the Commission required the parties (respondent and complainant) to appear before it for confirmation and explanation of the telegraphic message and required them to file a formal motion to dismiss the complaint within fifteen (15) days from notice. Neither party responded and nothing was heard from either party since then.
Complainant having failed to submit her evidenceex partebefore the Commission, the IBP Board of Governors submitted to this Court its report reprimanding respondent for his acts, admonishing him that any further acts of immorality in the future will be dealt with more severely, and ordering him to support his legitimate family as a responsible parent should.
The findings of the IBP Board of Governors may be summed up as follows:
Complainant and respondent Cordova were married on 6 June 1976 and out of this marriage, two (2) children were born. In 1985, the couple lived somewhere in Quirino Province. In that year, respondent Cordova left his family as well as his job as Branch Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court, Cabarroguis, Quirino Province, and went to Mangagoy, Bislig, Surigao del Sur with one Fely G. Holgado. Fely G. Holgado was herself married and left her own husband and children to stay with respondent. Respondent Cordova and Fely G. Holgado lived together in Bislig as husband and wife, with respondent Cordova introducing Fely to the public as his wife, and Fely Holgado using the name Fely Cordova. Respondent Cordova gave Fely Holgado funds with which to establish a sari-sari store in the public market at Bislig, while at the same time failing to support his legitimate family.
On 6 April 1986, respondent Cordova and his complainant wife had an apparent reconciliation. Respondent promised that he would separate from Fely Holgado and brought his legitimate family to Bislig, Surigao del Sur. Respondent would, however, frequently come home from beerhouses or cabarets, drunk, and continued to neglect the support of his legitimate family. In February 1987, complainant found, upon returning from a trip to Manila necessitated by hospitalization of her daughter Loraine, that respondent Cordova was no longer living with her (complainant's) children in their conjugal home; that respondent Cordova was living with another mistress, one Luisita Magallanes, and had taken his younger daughter Melanie along with him. Respondent and his new mistress hid Melanie from the complinant, compelling complainant to go to court and to take back her daughter byhabeas corpus.The Regional Trial Court, Bislig, gave her custody of their children.
Notwithstanding respondent's promises to reform, he continued to live with Luisita Magallanes as her husband and continued to fail to give support to his legitimate family.
Finally the Commission received a telegram message apparently from complainant, stating that complainant and respondent had been reconciled with each other.
After a review of the record, we agree with the findings of fact of the IBP Board. We also agree that the most recent reconciliation between complainant and respondent, assuming the same to be real, does not excuse and wipe away the misconduct and immoral behavior of the respondent carried out in public, and necessarily adversely reflecting upon him as a member of the Bar and upon the Philippine Bar itself. An applicant for admission to membership in the bar is required to show that he is possessed of good moral character. That requirement is not exhausted and dispensed with upon admission to membership of the bar. On the contrary, that requirement persists as a continuing condition for membership in the Bar in good standing.
In Mortel v. Aspiras,1this Court, following the rule in the United States, held that "the continued possession ... of a good moral character is a requisite condition for the rightful continuance in the practice of the law ... and its loss requires suspension or disbarment, even though the statutes do not specify that as a ground for disbarment. "2It is important to note that the lack of moral character that we here refer to as essential is not limited to good moral character relating to the discharge of the duties and responsibilities of an attorney at law. The moral delinquency that affects the fitness of a member of the bar to continue as such includes conduct that outrages the generally accepted moral standards of the community, conduct for instance, which makes "a mockery of the inviolable social institution or marriage."3InMortel,the respondent being already married, wooed and won the heart of a single, 21-year old teacher who subsequently cohabited with him and bore him a son. Because respondent's conduct inMortelwas particularly morally repulsive, involving the marrying of his mistress to his own son and thereafter cohabiting with the wife of his own son after the marriage he had himself arranged, respondent was disbarred.
In Royong v. Oblena,4the respondent was declared unfit to continue as a member of the bar by reason of his immoral conduct and accordingly disbarred. He was found to have engaged in sexual relations with the complainant who consequently bore him a son; and to have maintained for a number of years an adulterous relationship with another woman.
In the instant case, respondent Cordova maintained for about two (2) years an adulterous relationship with a married woman not his wife, in full view of the general public, to the humiliation and detriment of his legitimate family which he, rubbing salt on the wound, failed or refused to support. After a brief period of "reform" respondent took up again with another woman not his wife, cohabiting with her and bringing along his young daughter to live with them. Clearly, respondent flaunted his disregard of the fundamental institution of marriage and its elementary obligations before his own daughter and the community at large.
WHEREFORE,the Court Resolved toSUSPENDrespondent from the practice of law indefinitely and until farther orders from this Court. The Court will consider lifting his suspension when respondent Cordova submits proof satisfactory to the Commission and this Court that he has and continues to provide for the support of his legitimate family and that he has given up the immoral course of conduct that he has clung to.
Fernan, C.J., Narvasa, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Paras, Feliciano, Gancayco, Padilla, Bidin, Sarmiento, Cortes, Griño-Aquino, Medialdea and Regalado, JJ., concur.
Melencio-Herrera, J., is on leave.
Footnotes