Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

FLOCERFIDA S. LANUZO v. ATTY. JESUS B. BONGON

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	AC. No. 4191 2013-06-10	ANITA C. PENA v. ATTY. CHRISTINA C. PATERNO PER CURIAM
In this case, the Clerk of Court of the RTC of Manila issued a Certification,[41] dated February 22, 1994, stating that respondent was duly appointed as a Notary Public for the City of Manila for the year 1986, and that respondent has not yet forwarded to the Clerk of Court's Office her Notarial Report for the month of November 1986, when the Deed of Sale was executed and notarized by her. Hence, a copy of the Notarial Report/Record and the said Deed of Sale could not also be found in the National Archives per the certification42 of the Archives Division Chief Teresita R. Ignacio for Director Edgardo J. Celis. The failure of respondent to fulfill her duty as notary public to submit her notarial register for the month of November 1986 and a copy of the said Deed of Sale that was notarized by her on the same month is cause for revocation of her commission under Section 249 of the Notarial Law.[43] Lawyers commissioned as notaries public are mandated to discharge with fidelity the duties of their offices, such duties being dictated by public policy and impressed with public interest.[44]
	AC. No. 7591 2012-03-20	CORAZON T. NEVADA v. ATTY. RODOLFO D. CASUGA VELASCO JR., J.
So it was that in Lanuzo v. Bongon[14] the Court suspended a notary public from the practice of law for one (1) year for violation of the Notarial Rules. This was on top of the penalty of disqualification from being commissioned as a notary public for two (2) years.
	AC. No. 8254 2012-02-15	NESA ISENHARDT v. ATTY. LEONARDO M. REAL PEREZ, J.
The duties of a notary public is dictated by public policy and impressed with public interest.[16] It is not a meaningless ministerial act of acknowledging documents executed by parties who are willing to pay the fees for notarization. It is of no moment that the subject SPA was not utilized by the grantee for the purpose it was intended because the property was allegedly transferred from complainant to her brother by virtue of a deed of sale consummated between them. What is being penalized is respondent's act of notarizing a document despite the absence of one of the parties. By notarizing the questioned document, he engaged in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.[17] A notarized document is by law entitled to full credit upon its face and it is for this reason that notaries public must observe the basic requirements in notarizing documents. Otherwise, the confidence of the public in notarized documents will be undermined.[18]
	AC. No. 7241 2011-10-17	ATTY. FLORITA S. LINCO v. ATTY. JIMMY D. LACEBAL PERALTA, J.
In Lanuzo v. Atty. Bongon,[19] respondent having failed to discharge his duties as a notary public, the revocation of his notarial commission, disqualification from being commissioned as a notary public for a period of two years and suspension from the practice of law for one year were imposed. We deem it proper to impose the same penalty.