Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Eloisa Goitia De la Camara (wife, plaintiff-appellant) and Jose claim support from the husband for separate
Campos-Rueda (husband, defendant-appellee) maintenance even outside the conjugal home.
o Married in MNL, Jan 7, 1915 _____________________________________________________
o Established residence at 115 Calle San Marcelino,
where they lived together for about a month SERMONIA V REPUBLIC
Eloisa returned to the house of her parents bec of the ff Jose Sermonia (petitioner)
allegations: o Charged w Bigamy before RTC Pasig for contracting
o Jose demanded of her that she perform unchaste and marriage with Ma. Lourdes Unson on 15 February
lascivious acts on his genital organs 1975 while his prior marriage to Virginia C. Nievera
o Eloisa spurned the obscene demands of Jose and remained valid and subsisting.
refused to perform any act other than legal and valid o moved to quash the information on the ground that his
cohabitation criminal liability for bigamy has been extinguished by
o Jose, since that date had continually on other prescription. DENIED on Oct 1, 1992. Petitioner then
successive dates, made similar lewd and indecorous filed an MR to such denial, but then again denied on
demands on his wife, Eloisa, who always spurned Oct 27, 1992.
them PRESCRIPTION The role that the passage
o Which just refusals of Eloisa exasperated Jose and of time plays in the making and ending of
induce him to maltreat her by word and deed and certain rights.
inflict injuries upon her lips, her face and different parts the effect of the lapse of time in creating and
of her body destroying rights
o Eloisa was unable by any means to induce Jose to o He then challenged the above orders before the Court
desist from his repugnant desires and cease from of Appeals through a petition for certiorari and
maltreating her, she was obliged to leave the conjugal prohibition.
abode and take refuge in the home of her parents. Petitioners arguments:
TRIAL COURT: Eloisa filed a claim for support, where the same o his criminal liability for bigamy has been obliterated by
was dismissed as the court held that Jose cannot be compelled prescription. He avers that since the second marriage
to support Eloisa, except in his own house, unless it be by contract was duly registered with the Office of the Civil
virtue of a judicial decree granting her a divorce or separation Registrar in 1975, 7 such fact of registration makes it a
from him. matter of public record and thus constitutes notice to
Jose furthermore objects that the facts alleged in the complaint the whole world. The offended party therefore is
do not state a cause of action. considered to have had constructive notice of the
ISSUE: Whether or not Goitia can compel her husband to subsequent marriage as of 1975; hence, prescription
commenced to run on the day the marriage contract
support her outside the conjugal home.
was registered.
HELD:
o the second marriage was publicly held at Our Lady of
o The obligation on the part of the husband to support
Nativity Church in Marikina on 15 February 1975, and
his wife is created merely in the act of marriage. The adding for good measure that from the moment of
law provides that the husband, who is obliged to registration the marriage contract was open to
support the wife, may fulfill the obligation either by inspection by any interested person.
paying her a fixed pension or by maintaining her in his
Court of Appeals:
own home at his option.
o Dismissed his petition for lack of merit.
ART 149 CC: The person obliged to give
o PRINCIPLE OF CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE: should
support may, at his option, satisfy it, either by
paying the pension that may be fixed or by not be applied in regard to the crime of bigamy as
receiving and maintaining in his own home judicial notice may be taken of the fact that a
the person having the right to the same. bigamous marriage is generally entered into by the
o However, this option given by law is not absolute. The offender in secrecy from the spouse of the previous
subsisting marriage.
law will not permit the husband to evade or terminate
o CONCEALMENT ISSUE:
his obligation to support his wife if the wife is driven
away from the conjugal home because of his wrongful While the celebration of the bigamous
acts. marriage may be said to be open and made
READ FOR EXPLANATION: That in of public record by its registration, the
accordance with the ruling of the supreme offender however is not truthful as he
court of Spain in its decisions dated May 11, conceals from the officiating authority and
1897, November 25, 1899, and July 5, 1901, those concerned the existence of his
the option which article 149 grants the previous subsisting marriage. He does not
person, obliged to furnish subsistence, reveal to them that he is still a married
between paying the pension fixed or person. xxx And for these, he contracts the
receiving and keeping in his own house the bigamous marriage in a place where he is not
party who is entitled to the same, is not so known to be still a married person. And such
absolute as to prevent cases being a place may be anywhere, under which
considered wherein, either because this right circumstance, the discovery of the bigamous
would be opposed to the exercise of a marriage is rendered quite difficult and would
preferential right or because of the existence take time. It is therefore reasonable that the
of some justifiable cause morally opposed to prescriptive period for the crime of bigamy
the removal of the party enjoying the should be counted only from the day on
maintenance, the right of selection must be which the said crime was discovered by the
understood as being thereby restricted. offended party, the authorities or their agency.
o In the case at bar, the wife was forced to leave the if the prescriptive period for the offense of
conjugal abode because of the lewd designs and bigamy were to be counted from the date of
registration thereof, the prosecution of the o that the lots which were partitioned in said document
violators of the said offense would almost be belonged to the conjugal partnership of the spouses
impossible. Lucio Perido and Benita Talorong
The interpretation urged by the petitioner o and that the five children of Lucio Perido with
would encourage fearless violations of a Marcelina Baliguat were all illegitimate and therefore
social institution cherished and protected by had no successional rights to the estate of Lucio
law. Perido
ISSUE: WON the Petitioner committed the crime of bigamy July 31, 1965: Trial Court rendered its decision re the
HELD: annulment of the DHEP, however it did not order the partition of
o CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE ISSUE: the lots involved among the plaintiffs exclusively in view of its
there is no legal basis for applying the findings that the five children of Lucio Perido with his second
constructive notice rule to the documents wife, Marcelina Baliguat, were legitimate.
registered in the Civil Register. o that all the lots, except Lot No. 458, were the exclusive
Sec 52 of PD 1529 (Property Registration properties of Lucio Perido;
Decree) has no counterpart provision either o and that 11/12 of Lot No. 458 belonged to the conjugal
in Act partnership of Lucio Perido and his second wife,
No. 3753 (Act to Establish a Civil Register) or Marcelina Baliguat.
in Arts. 407 to 413 of the Civil Code CA affirmed the trial courts decision. Nag-PetRev sa SC.
o CONCEALMENT ISSUE: ISSUE: W/N the children and grandchildren of the second
petitioner would want us to believe that there marriage of Lucio Perido were legitimate, entitling them for the
was no concealment at all because his partition of lands
marriage contract with Ms. Unson was HELD:
recorded in the Civil Registry which is open to o LEGITIMACY ISSUE:
all and sundry for inspection. found that there was evidence to show that
We cannot go along with his argument Lucio Perido's wife, Benita Talorong, died
because why did he indicate in the marriage during the Spanish regime.
contract that he was "single" thus obviously Lucio Perido had no legal impediment to
hiding his true status as a married man? Or marry Marcelina Baliguat before the birth of
for that matter, why did he not simply tell his their first child in 1900.
first wife about the subsequent marriage in With respect to the civil status of Lucio Perido
Marikina so that everything would be out in as stated in the certificates of title issued to
the open. him in 1923, the Court of Appeals correctly
Obviously, petitioner had no intention of held that the statement was not conclusive to
revealing his duplicity to his first spouse and show that he was not actually married to
gambled instead on the probability that she or Marcelina Baliguat. Furthermore, it is weak
any third party would ever go to the local civil and insufficient to rebut the presumption that
registrar to inquire. persons living together husband and wife are
o Affirmed CA decision. Petitioner guilty of BIGAMY. married to each other. This presumption,
_____________________________________________________ especially where legitimacy of the issue is
involved, as in this case, may be overcome
PERIDO V PERIDO only by cogent proof on the part of those who
Lucio Perido of Himamlayan, Negros Occidental, married twice allege the illegitimacy.
during his lifetime the Court of Appeals did not err in concluding
o FIRST: with Benita Talorong, begot 3 children, namely: that the five children of Lucio Perido and
Felix, Ismael, and Margarita Marcelina Baliguat were born during their
o SECOND (after Benita died): with Marcelina Baliguat, marriage and, therefore, legitimate.
begot 5 children: Eusebio, Juan, Maria, Sofronia and o DETERMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT LOTS
Gonzalo NOS. 471, 506, 511, 509-513-PART, 807 AND 808
o Died in 1942. Second wife, Marcelina, died in 1943 WERE THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTIES OF LUCIO
FIRST MARRIAGE: Only Margarita is alive PERIDO:
SECOND MARRIAGE: Maria, Sofronia, and Gonzalo are the CA: We cannot agree again with them on
only ones alive this point. It is to be noted that the lands
Aug 15, 1960: the children and grandchildren of the first and covered by the certificates of title (Exhs. B to
G) were all declared in the name of Lucio
second marriages of Lucio Perido executed a document
Perido. Then there is evidence showing that
denominated as Declaration of Heirship and Extra-judicial
the lands were inherited by Lucio Perido from
Partition (DHEP for brevity) -- whereby they partitioned among
his grandmother (t.s.n., p. 21, Feb. 20, 1964).
themselves Lots Nos. 458, 471, 506, 511, 509, 513-B, 807, and
In other words, they were the exclusive
808, all of the Cadastral Survey of Himamaylan, Occidental
properties of the late Lucio Perido which he
Negros.
brought into the first and second marriages.
March 8, 1926: children belonging to the 1st marriage filed a
By fiat of law said Properties should be
complaint against the children of the 2 nd marriage, praying for divided accordingly among his legal heirs.
the annulment of the DHEP, and for another partition of the lots o 11/12 OF LOT 458 WAS THE CONJUGAL
mentioned therein AMONG THE PLAINTIFFS ALONE.
PARTNERSHIP PROPERTY OF LUCIO PERIDO AND
o They alleged, among other things, that they had been
HIS SECOND WIFE, MARCELINA BALIGUAT:
induced by the defendants to execute the document in The finding of the lower court on this point
question through misrepresentation, false promises
need not be disturbed. It is expressly stated
and fraudulent means;
in the certificate of title that Lucio Perido, the
registered owner, was married to Marcelina
Baliguat unlike in the previous land titles. If
the law presumes a property registered in the o RA 9048 (Clerical Error Law):
name of only one of the spouses to be SECTION 1. Authority to Correct Clerical or
conjugal, the presumption becomes stronger Typographical Error and Change of First Name or
when the document recites that the spouse in Nickname. No entry in a civil register shall be
whose name the land is registered is married changed or corrected without a judicial order, except
to somebody else, like in the case at bar. It for clerical or typographical errors and change of first
appearing that the legal presumption that the name or nickname which can be corrected or changed
No. 458 belonged to the conjugal partnership by the concerned city or municipal civil registrar or
had not been overcome by clear proofs to the consul general in accordance with the provisions of
contrary, we are constrained to rule, that the this Act and its implementing rules and regulations.
same is the conjugal property of the SECTION 4. Grounds for Change of First Name or
deceased spouses Lucio Perido and Nickname. The petition for change of first name or
Marcelina Baliguat. nickname may be allowed in any of the following
o Affirmed the decision of the CA. cases:
(1) The petitioner finds the first name or nickname
_____________________________________________________ to be ridiculous, tainted with dishonor or extremely
difficult to write or pronounce;
SILVERIO V REPUBLIC (2) The new first name or nickname has been
Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio (petitioner) habitually and continuously used by the petitioner and
o Nov 26, 2002 filed a petn for the change of his first he has been publicly known by that first name or
name and sex in his birth certificate in the RTC Mnl. nickname in the community; or
Impleaded the civil registrar of Mnl as respondent. (3) The change will avoid confusion.
o alleged that he is a male transsexual, that is, HELD:
anatomically male but feels, thinks and acts as a o No. There is no law authorizes the change of entry as
female and that he had always identified himself with of sex and first name through the intervention of sex
girls since childhood reassignment surgery. Article 376 of the Civil Code as
o Feeling trapped in a mans body, he consulted several amended by RA 9048 (Clerical Error Law), together
doctors in the United States. He underwent with Article 412 of the same Code, change of name or
psychological examination, hormone treatment and sex in the birth certificate is allowed by the courts so
breast augmentation. His attempts to transform long as clerical or typographical errors are involved.
himself to a woman culminated on January 27, 2001 o Changes sought by Silverio will have serious legal and
when he underwent sex reassignment surgery2 in public policy consequences.
Bangkok, Thailand To grant this petition filed by Silverio will
o From then on, petitioner lived as a female and was in greatly alter the laws on marriage and family
fact engaged to be married. He then sought to have relations.
his name in his birth certificate changed from Rommel Second, there will be major changes in
Jacinto to Mely, and his sex from male to female. statutes that underscore the public policy in
TRIAL COURT: In favour of Silverio relation to women.
o granting the petition would be more in consonance certain felonies under the Revised Penal
with the principles of justice and equity. With his sexual Code
[re-assignment], petitioner, who has always felt, and the presumption of survivorship in case
thought and acted like a woman, now possesses the of calamities under Rule 131 of the Rules of
physique of a female. Petitioners misfortune to be Court,41 among others.
trapped in a mans body is not his own doing and _____________________________________________________
should not be in any way taken against him.
o the [c]ourt believes that no harm, injury [or] prejudice PEOPLE V DELA CRUZ
will be caused to anybody or the community in Parricide against Victoriano Lorenzo Dela Cruz (appellant)
granting the petition. On the contrary, granting the PROSECS VERSION:
petition would bring the much-awaited happiness on Joel Song: bw 3:30-4PM, Aug 18, 2002, he and 2 others,
the part of the petitioner and her [fianc] and the including the aunt of Victoriano, playing tong-its a few kms
realization of their dreams. away from Vics house
o no evidence was presented to show any cause or While playing, Joel saw Vic punching and kicking his wife,
ground to deny the present petition despite due notice herein victim Anna Liza Caparas-dela Cruz (Anna). Vic then
and publication thereof. Even the State, through the dragged Anna inside the house by pulling the latters hair, then
[OSG] has not seen fit to interpose any [o]pposition. slammed the door. Joel overheard the couple shouting while
Aug 18, 2003 the Republic of the PH (Republic), thru the they were already inside the house.
OSG, filed a petition for certiorari in the Court of Appeals. It Vic and Anna came out of the house, together with their young
alleged that there is no law allowing the change of entries in the daughter. Vic was behind Anna, with his arms wrapped around
birth certificate by reason of sex alteration. her. He asked for Joels help. Joel noticed blood spurting out of
CA: rendered a decision in favour of the Republic. Said that Annas mouth. He took the couples daughter and gave her to
TCs decision lacked legal basis. There is no law allowing the Vics aunt.
change of either name or sex in the certificate of birth on the He then went with them to the Bulacan Provincial Hospital on
ground of sex reassignment through surgery. Set aside the TCs board a tricycle. However, Anna died.
decision. On the same day, at about 6:30 p.m., Senior Police Officers 1
Silverio filed an MR, but was denied, hence, this petition. Condrado Umali and Eligio Jose, responding to the call of duty,
ISSUE: WON the change of name and sex is allowed on the went to the hospital for investigation. There, Vic was turned
basis of sex assignment over to the police officers by the hospital's security guard on
RELEVANT LAWS: duty.
o ART 376 CC: No person can change his name or DEFENSES VERSION:
surname without judicial authority. Victoriano:
o Around 6:30PM, Aug 18, 2002, he went home very o To support their cause, the petitioners and their
drunk from a friends house. siblings appended in their Manifestation, the following
o Before he could enter their house, his wife, Anna, documents:
started nagging him saying, Hindi ka naman pala 2 marriage certificates between Isabel and
namamasada, nakipag-inuman ka pa. He asked her Rodolfo;
to go inside their house but she refused. Thus, Vic The birth certificate of their mother, Sylvia;
slapped Anna and dragged her inside their house. Their respective proof of births.
o Continuous nagging of Anna Vic pushed her aside Bernardinos defense:
so he could go out of the house She fell on a o the petitioners and their siblings have failed to
jalousie window, breaking it in the process. He establish the status of Isabel as an heir of Rodolfo.
helped her stand up, Victoriano noticed that her back The very evidence presented by the petitioners and
was punctured by a piece of shattered glass of the their siblings showed that Isabel had a previous and
jalousie. subsisting marriage with John Desantis at the time she
o He brought her outside immediately and asked the was purportedly married to Rodolfo.
help of his neighbors who were playing tong-its o COMMENT TO THE MANIFESTATION:
nearby. Vic admitted that Joel accompanied him and In Sylvias birth cert, Sylvia was a legitimate
his wife to the hospital. child of Isabel and John
o Also testified that he does not usually drink; that he Also on the same document, Isabel and John
consumed hard liquor at the time of the incident; that were married
Anna was not immediately treated in the hospital; that o According to the respondent, Isabels previous
he loved his wife; and that he did not intentionally hurt
marriage, in the absence of any proof that it was
her.
dissolved, made her subsequent marriage with
TRIAL COURT: found Vic guilty of Parricide Art 246 of RPC Rodolfo bigamous and void ab initio.
CA: affirmed TCs decision INTESTATE COURT: convinced that the evidence at hand
ISSUE: WON Vic was guilty of the crime of Parricide adequately establish Isabels status as the legal spouse of
RELEVANT LAWS: Rodolfo and, by that token, permitted the petitioners and their
o ART 246 RPC: Parricide. Any person who shall kill his siblings to intervene in the proceedings on her behalf.
father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or ISSUE: W/N the marriage of Isabel and Rodolfo was valid
illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or descendants, HELD:
or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and shall be o the existence of a previous marriage between Isabel
punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to and John Desantis was adequately established.
death. o In the present case, the birth certificate of Sylvia
o The key element in Parricide other than the fact of precisely serves as the competent evidence of
killing is the relationship of the offender to the marriage between Isabel and John Desantis. As
victim. In the case of Parricide of a spouse, the best mentioned earlier, it contains the following notable
proof of the relationship between the accused and the entries: (a) that Isabel and John Desantis were
deceased would be the marriage certificate. "married" and (b) that Sylvia is their "legitimate"
HELD: child.50 In clear and categorical language, Sylvias
o In this case, the testimony of the accused that he was birth certificate speaks of a subsisting marriage
married to the victim, in itself, is ample proof of such between Isabel and John Desantis.
relationship as the testimony can be taken as an o The inability of the petitioners and their siblings to
admission against penal interest Clearly, then, it was present evidence to prove that Isabels prior marriage
established that Victoriano and Anna were husband was dissolved results in a failure to establish that she
and wife. has interest in the estate of Rodolfo. Clearly, an
o In sum, Victoriano failed to sufficiently show that the intervention by the petitioners and their siblings in the
CA committed any reversible error in its assailed settlement proceedings cannot be justified.
Decision. His guilt was sufficiently established by o Affirmed CAs decision.
circumstantial evidence.
o Guys, sa case na to, hindi ko na diniscuss yung crim _____________________________________________________
stuff. Yung exempting chenes, na kesho aksidente
lang daw yung nangyari, kasi ang issue lang naman CERCADO-SIGA V CERCADO, JR
kung dapat bang parricide, which was proven by the petitioners Simplicia Cercado-Siga (Simplicia) and Ligaya
marriage of the accused and the victim. Yun lang. Cercado-Belison (Ligaya) claimed that they are the legitimate
children of the late Vicente and Benita Castillo (Benita), married
_____________________________________________________ on Oct 9, 1929
o alleged that during the lifetime of their parents, their
DE SANTIS V.INTESTATE ESTATE JALANDONI father acquired by gratuitous title a parcel of land
Rodolfo Jalandoni died intestate. identified as Lot No. 7627 Cad 609-D located at
Apr 28, 1967 - Bernardino G. Jalandoni (Bernardino), the Barangay Kinagatan, Binangonan, Rizal with an area
brother of Rodolfo, filed a petition for the issuance of letters of of 6,032 square meters and covered by Tax
administration9 with the Court of First Instance of Negros Declaration No. BIP-021-0253.
Occidental, to commence the judicial settlement of the latters o claimed that upon the death of their father Vicente and
estate. by virtue of intestate succession, ownership over the
Jan 17, 2003 - introduced themselves as the children of Sylvia subject land pertained to them as heirs
Blee Desantis (Sylvia)who, in turn, was revealed to be the o upon the death of Benita, her share was acquired by
daughter of Isabel Blee (Isabel) with one John Desantis. petitioners by operation of law.
o contend that their grandmotherIsabelwas, at the Sometime in September 1998, petitioners read from a
time of Rodolfos death, the legal spouse of the newspaper a notice that the estate of Vicente and a certain
latter.13 For which reason, Isabel is entitled to a share Leonora Ditablan has been extrajudicially settled by their heirs,
in the estate of Rodolfo. respondents herein.
o petitioners were furnished a copy of the Extrajudicial recognized the signatures, or the person to whom the
Settlement of the Estate (Deed) executed and signed parties to the instruments had previously confessed
by respondents. execution thereof. As observed by the Court of
o Petitioners insist that Vicente and Leonora were not Appeals, petitioners failed to present any one of such
married or if they were so married, then said marriage witnesses.
was null and void by reason of the subsisting marriage o the document presented to prove Ligayas kinship is a
of their parents, Vicente and Benita. Joint Affidavit executed by two persons to the effect
Petitioners prayed: that she was born to Vicente and Benita. These two
o for the declaration of the Deed as null and void affiants were never presented in court. Thus, their
o for the Office of the Register of Deeds of Rizal to statement is tantamount to hearsay evidence.
correct the entry on the marital status of Vicente o While we acknowledge the difficulty of obtaining old
o for the payment of damages and attorneys fees. records, we simply cannot ignore the rules on
evidence, specifically the rule on authentication with
To prove the marriage between Vicente and Benita, petitioners
respect to private documents which is precisely in
presented the following documents:
place to prevent the inclusion of spurious documents
o marriage contract
in the body of evidence that will determine the
o Certification dated 19 November 2000 issued by resolutions of an issue.
Iglesia Filipina Independiente of its acceptance of o Considering that petitioners failed to prove the validity
original marriage contract of the marriage between Vicente and Benita, it follows
o Certification of non-production of record of birth of that they do not have a cause of action in the case for
Simplicia issued by the Office of the Municipal Civil the declaration of nullity of the Extrajudicial Settlement
Registrar of Pililla, Rizal of the Estate of Vicente and Leonora.
o Certificate of Baptism of Simplicia _____________________________________________________
o Certification of non-production of record of birth of
Ligaya issued by the Office of the Municipal Civil ESPINOSA v ATTY. OMANA
Registrar of Pililla, Rizal
o Joint Affidavit of two disinterested persons attesting Complainant: Rodolfo Espinosa and Maximo Glindo
that Ligaya is the child of Vicente and Benita. Respondent: Atty. Julieta A. Omaa
Respondents answer: Citation: AC No. 9081
o they are the legitimate heirs of Vicente and Leonora, Date of Promulgation: October 12, 2011
who were married on 27 June 1977 as evidenced by a Ponente: Carpio
marriage certificate registered with the Local Civil
Registrar of Binangonan, Rizal FACTS:
o averred that petitioners are not the real-parties-interest Nov. 17, 1997: Espinosa and his wife ELENA MARANTAL
to institute the case because they failed to present sought Atty. Omaas advice on whether they could legally
their birth certificates to prove their filiation to Vicente separately and dissolve their marriage solemnized on July 23,
o that the marriage between Vicente and Benita was not 1983
valid Atty. Omaa: Kasunduan ng Paghihiwalay
o the document showing that Vicente was married to Stipulations:
Benita is not a certified true copy 1. Na nais na naming maghiwalay at magkanya-kanya ng aming mga
o that they are now estopped by laches. buhay ng walang pakialaman, kung kayat bawat isa sa amin ay maaari
RTC: ruled in favour of the petitioners ng humanap ng makakasama sa buhay
2. Na ang aming mga anak na sina Ariel John Espinosa, 14 na taong
CA: reversed the RTCs decision gulang; Aiza Espinosa, 11 taong gulang at Aldrin Espinosa, 10 taong
o The appellate court ruled that the trial court can pass gulang ay namili na kung kanino sasama sa aming dalawa. Si Ariel
upon the issue of the validity of marriage of Vicente John at Aiza Espinosa ay sasama sa kanilang ama, Rodolfo Espinosa,
and Leonora [because] no judicial action is necessary at ang bunso, Aldrin Espinosa at sasama naman sa ina na si Elena;
to declare a marriage an absolute nullity and the court 3. Na dahil sina Ariel John at Aiza ay nagsisipag-aral sa kasalukuyan
sila ay pansamantalang mananatili sa kanilang ina, habang tinatapos
may pass upon the validity of a marriage even in a suit
ang kanilang pag-aaral. Sa pasukan sila ay maaari ng isama ng ama,
not directly instituted to question the same, as long as sa lugar kung saan siya ay naninirahan;
it is essential to the determination of the case before 4. Na ang mga bata ay maaaring dalawin ng sino man sa aming dalawa
it. tuwing may pagkakataon
o the appellate court found that the Contrato Matrimonial 5. Na magbibigay ng buwanang gastusin o suporta ang ama kay Aldrin
of Vicente and Benita, being a private document, was at ang kakulangan sa mga pangangailangan nito ay pupunan ng ina;
not properly authenticated, hence, not admissible in 6. Na lahat ng mga kasangkapan sa bahay tulad ng T.V., gas stove,
mga kagamitan sa kusina ay aking (Rodolfo) ipinagkakaloob kay Elena
evidence
at hindi na ako interesado dito;
o did not consider the baptismal certificate submitted by 7. Na lahat ng maaaring maipundar ng sino man sa amin dalawa sa
petitioners as conclusive proof of filiation. mga panahong darating ay aming mga sari-sariling pag-aari na at hindi
o The Joint Affidavit executed by a certain Mario Casale na pinagsamahan o conjugal.
and Balas Chimlangco attesting to the birth of Ligaya Complainants alleged that Marantal and Espinosa executed
to Vicente and Benita was not given credence by the and implemented the provisions of this Contact, as they were
appellate court for being a hearsay evidence. fully convinced of its validity
o failure of petitioners to prove their cause of action by Marantal eventually took custody of all their children and took
preponderance of evidence possession of most of the property acquired during their union
HELD: Affirmed the CAs decision. PETITION DENIED. Espinosa then asked for the advice of Grildo (a law graduate
o Under Section 20, Rule 132, Rules of Court, before a and his co-employee), who informed him that the Kasunduan
private document is admitted in evidence, it must be was invalid
authenticated either by the person who executed it, Espinosa and Grildo then filed a complaint for disbarment
the person before whom its execution was against Atty. Omaa before IBP. Grounds: violation of her
acknowledged, any person who was present and saw lawyers oath, malpractice and gross misconduct in the office
it executed, or who after its execution, saw it and Atty. Omaas Contentions:
1. She knows Glindo but she does not personally know 1951: Soledad gave up teaching and became a life insurance
Espinosa underwriter in Cebu City, where intimacy developed between
2. She denies preparing the Kasunduan them
3. She admitted that Espinosa went to see her and requested 1953: One evening, after watching movies, they had sexual
for the notarization of the Kasunduan, but she told him it intercourse in his cabin on board M/V Escano to which he was
was illegal the apprentice pilot
4. Espinosa returned the next day and persuaded her office February 1954: Soledad advised Francisco that she was in a
staff, ARLENE DELA PEA to notarize the same. family was, whereupon, he promised to marry her
Signature was forged
June 17, 1954: Chris Hermosisima was born
5. She also submitted Marantas Affidavit to support her
claims and to show that the Complaint is instigated by July 24, 1954: Francisco married one ROMANITA PEREZ
Glindo, and a Letter of Apology from her staff October 4, 1954: Moral Damages for Breach of Promise to
Espinosa later submitted a Karagdagang Salaysay stating that Marry
Atty.Omaa was not in her office when the document was RTC:
notarized WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered, declaring the child, Chris
Hermosisima, as the natural daughter of defendant, and confirming the
DECISION OF IBP-COMMISSION ON BAR DISCIPLINE: order pendente lite, ordering defendant to pay to the said child, through
1. Respondent truly signed the document, yet she still plaintiff, the sum of thirty pesos (P30.00), payable on or before the fifth
disclaimed its authorship, thereby revealing much more her day of every month sentencing defendant to pay to plaintiff the sum of
propensity to lie and make deceit, which she is deserving FOUR THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P4,500.00) for actual
of a disciplinary action or disbarment and compensatory damages; the sum of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS
2. Suspension of 1 year from the practice of law and for 2 (P5,000.00) as moral damages; and the further sum of FIVE
years as a Notary Public HUNDRED PESOS (P500.00) as attorney's fees for plaintiff, with costs
against defendant
ISSUE: W/N Omaa violated the Canon of Professional
CA: affirmed the RTC decision, except as to the actual and
Responsibility in the notarization of Marantal and Espinosas
compensatory and moral damages, which were increased to
Kasunduan ng Paghihiwalay?
PhP 5614.25 and PhP 7,000, respectively
HELD:
ISSSUE: W/N moral damages are recoverable, under our laws,
Finding of IBP were adopted
for breach of promise to marry?
Extrajudicial dissolution of the conjugal partnership without
HELD:
judicial approval is void. Notary public should not facilitate
SC affimed the CA decision, but eliminated the award for
the disintegration of a marriage and a family by
encouraging the separation of the spouses and damages
extrajudicially dissolving the conjugal partnership In De Jesus v Syquia, it was ruled that action for breach of
The allegation that it was her office staff who notarized that promise to marry has no standing in civil law, apart from
document is unaaceptable. Even if it was true, it only the right to recover money or property advanced upon the
shows her negligence in doing her notarial duties. A notary faith of such promise.
public is personally responsible for the entries in his The history of breach of promise suit in the US and in
notarial register and he could not relieve himself of this England has shown that no other action lends itself more
responsibility by passing blame on his secretaries or any readily to abuse by designing women and unscrupulous
member of his staff jmen. It is this experience which has led to the abolition of
We likewise agree with the IBP-CBD that in preparing and the rights of action in the so-called Balm suit in US states
notarizing a void document, Omaa violated Rule 1.01, Apart from the fact that the general tenor of said Article
Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which 2219, particularly the paragraphs preceding and those
provides that "[a] lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, following the one cited by the Court of Appeals, and the
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct." Omaa knew fully language used in said paragraph strongly indicates that the
well that the "Kasunduan Ng Paghihiwalay" has no legal "seduction" therein contemplated is the crime punished as
effect and is against public policy. Therefore, Omaa may such in Article as such in Article 337 and 338 of the
be suspended from office as an attorney for breach of the Revised Penal Code, which admittedly does not exist in the
ethics of the legal profession as embodied in the Code of present case, we find ourselves unable to say that
Professional Responsibility petitioner is morally guilty of seduction, not only because
WHEREFORE, we SUSPEND Atty. Julieta A. Omaa from he is approximately ten (10) years younger than the
the practice of law for ONE YEAR. We REVOKE Atty. complainant who around thirty-six (36) years of age, and
Omaas notarial commission, if still existing, as highly enlightened as a former high school teacher and
and SUSPEND her as a notary public for TWO YEARS. a life insurance agent are supposed to be when she
_____________________________________________________ became intimate with petitioner, then a mere apprentice
pilot, but, also, because, the court of first instance found
that, complainant "surrendered herself" to petitioner
because, "overwhelmed by her love" for him, she "wanted
HERMOSISIMA v CA to bind" "by having a fruit of their engagement even before
Complainant: Francisco Hermisisima they had the benefit of clergy
Respondent: CA
Citation: 109 PHIL 629 _____________________________________________________
Date of Promulgation: September 30, 1960
Ponente: Concepcion WASSMER v VELEZ