Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

RIZALINA L. GEMINA v. ATTY. ISIDRO S. MADAMBA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	AC. No. 8507 2015-11-10	ELENA BIETE LEONES VDA. DE MILLER v. ATTY. ROLANDO B. MIRANDA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
A notary public is empowered to perform a variety of notarial acts, most common of which are the acknowledgement and affirmation of documents or instruments. In the performance of these notarial acts, the notary public must be mindful of the significance of the notarial seal affixed on documents. The notarial seal converts a document from a private to a public instrument, after which it may be presented as evidence without need of proof of its genuineness and due execution. Thus, notarization should not be treated as an empty, meaningless or routinary act. A notary public exercises duties calling for carefulness and faithfulness. Notaries must inform themselves of the facts they certify to; most importantly, they should not take part or allow themselves to be part of illegal transactions.[20] The importance of the functions of a notary public is highlighted in De Jesus v. Sanchez-Malit[21] as follows: The important role a notary public performs cannot be overemphasized. The Court has repeatedly stressed that notarization is not an empty, meaningless routinary act, but one invested with substantive public interest. Notarization converts a private document into a public document, making it admissible in evidence without further proof of its authenticity. Thus, a notarized document is, by law, entitled to full faith and credit upon its face. It is for this reason that a notary public must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance of his notarial duties; otherwise, the public's confidence in the integrity of a notarized document would be undermined.[22] (Emphasisd and underscoring supplied)
	AC. No. 10783 2015-10-14	ATTY. BENIGNO T. BARTOLOME v. ATTY. CHRISTOPHER A. BASILIO PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
A notary public exercises duties calling for carefulness and faithfulness.[20] Notaries must inform themselves of the facts they certify to; most importantly, they should not take part or allow themselves to be part of illegal transactions.[21] In line with this mandate, a notary public should not notarize a document unless the person who signed the same is the very person who executed and personally appeared before him to attest to the contents and the truth of what are stated therein.[22] By failing in this regard, the notary public permits a falsehood which does not only transgress the Notarial Rules but also Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which provides that "[a] lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct."[23] Verily, a notarized document is, by law, entitled to full faith and credit upon its face; and it is for this reason that a notary public must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance of his duties; otherwise, the public's confidence in the integrity of a notarized document would be undermined.
	AC. No. 9385 2013-11-11	MARIANO AGADAN v. ATTY. RICHARD BALTAZAR KILAAN DEL CASTILLO, J.
In Gemina v. Atty. Madamba,[14] we have also ruled that
	AC. No. 7880 2012-04-11	WILLIAM HECTOR MARIA v. ATTY. WILFREDO R. CORTEZ REYES, J.
We agree with the IBP that the respondent's Answer to the complaint, is virtually an admission that he failed to exercise the due diligence required of him in the performance of the duties of notary public. Such negligence can not be countenanced and definitely warrants sanction from the Court. In imposing the penalty, the Court is mindful that removal from the Bar should not really be decreed when any punishment less severe - reprimand, temporary suspension or fine - would accomplish the end desired.[17]