AC 13674; (August, 2023) (Digest)
G.R. No. A.C. No. 13674 (Formerly CBD Case No. 16-5221), August 1, 2023
Monette Manauis-Taggueg, Complainant, vs. Atty. Vincenzo Nonato M. Taggueg, Respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Monette Manauis-Taggueg and respondent Atty. Vincenzo Nonato M. Taggueg were married on June 6, 2002, and have one child. In March 2015, respondent abandoned complainant and their family. An investigation revealed respondent was cohabiting with another woman, Cindy Villajuan, in San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan. Complainant discovered through Cindy Villajuan’s social media account that she used the surname “Taggueg” and that pictures of a wedding ceremony between respondent and Cindy, allegedly held on February 20, 2015, were posted. The owner of the alleged wedding venue confirmed the ceremony. Complainant filed a disbarment complaint before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) on December 13, 2016, for gross immorality, alleging respondent abandoned his legitimate family and contracted a bigamous marriage. Respondent failed to file an answer, attend the mandatory conference, submit a mandatory conference brief, or participate in the proceedings despite notices from the IBP-CBD. Complainant submitted evidence including their marriage certificate, their child’s birth certificate, printouts of the social media pictures, a reservation slip, and a customer inquiry form regarding the alleged wedding. The IBP-CBD recommended disbarment. The IBP Board of Governors modified this to an indefinite suspension and a fine of Twenty Thousand Pesos (Php20,000.00) for disobeying the IBP-CBD’s orders.
ISSUE
Whether or not respondent Atty. Vincenzo Nonato M. Taggueg should be held administratively liable for Gross Immorality.
RULING
Yes, respondent is administratively liable for Gross Immorality. The Supreme Court adopted the IBP Board of Governors’ findings but modified the penalty to DISBARMENT.
The Court held that lawyers must possess and maintain good moral character. Respondent’s conductabandoning his lawful wife and child to cohabit with another woman and flaunting the illicit relationship on social mediaconstitutes grossly immoral conduct. It is willful, flagrant, and shows moral indifference, reprehensible to a high degree, and a blatant disregard of marriage laws. While the evidence may not conclusively prove a bigamous marriage, the extramarital affair and its public display seriously taint respondent’s moral fitness. Jurisprudence consistently imposes disbarment for such gross immorality. Respondent’s failure to comply with the IBP-CBD’s lawful orders was considered an aggravating circumstance under the new Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA). His prior three-month suspension in another administrative case was also noted. Considering the gravity of the offense and the aggravating circumstances, the supreme penalty of disbarment is warranted.