AC 500; (September, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. A.C. No. 500; September 27, 1967
Tahimik Ramirez, petitioner, vs. Atty. Jaime S. Ner, respondent.
FACTS
Respondent Atty. Jaime S. Ner, a lawyer and notary public, notarized a deed of sale for a motor vehicle on April 5, 1960. The acknowledgment clause falsely stated that both the vendor, Gavino Abaya, Jr., and the vendee, Edwardo I. Reyes, personally appeared before him. In reality, only Abaya and one witness appeared and signed. Respondent notarized the document upon Abaya’s promise to bring Reyes the next day to sign and acknowledge it, and to pay the consideration in respondent’s presence. Later that same day, Abaya informed respondent that his car and all copies of the notarized deed, along with the vehicle’s certificates, had been stolen by Reyes. Respondent then annotated “stolen and cancelled” in his notarial register. Using the stolen notarized deed, Reyes obtained a new certificate of registration and later sold the car to petitioner Tahimik Ramirez, who bought it in good faith relying on the deed. During the trial of a related criminal case for qualified theft, respondent admitted he notarized the deed despite the vendee’s non-appearance.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Atty. Jaime S. Ner violated his oath as a lawyer and notary public by notarizing a deed of sale with a false acknowledgment clause, thereby warranting disciplinary action.
RULING
Yes, respondent violated his duties. The Court found that by signing and affixing his notarial seal to a document that was incomplete and falsely certified the personal appearance of the vendee, respondent failed to exercise the utmost care required of a notary public. His act facilitated fraud, as the notarized deed allowed an unscrupulous party to give an appearance of legality to an illegal transaction, enabling the subsequent sale to an innocent purchaser. While the act suggested a lack of caution and not culpable malpractice or immorality serious enough to justify disbarment or suspension, it warranted a reprimand. The Court reprimanded respondent and admonished him to be more careful in the future.