G.R. No. A.M. No. 1263. January 30, 1982.
FELICIDAD DE GUZMAN-SARMIENTO, complainant, vs. ATTY. GODOFREDO A. VILLALON, respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Felicidad de Guzman-Sarmiento sought the disbarment of Atty. Godofredo A. Villalon for allegedly notarizing a deed of absolute sale over a portion of land co-owned by the complainant and her husband, Severino Sarmiento, despite her absence. The complaint, supported by the report of the Solicitor General, alleged that on January 21, 1970, the respondent notarized the deed wherein it was made to appear that the complainant personally appeared and signed before him. In truth, the complainant was abroad on that date. The document was purportedly signed by her daughter, Aida S. Bernardo, on her behalf at a different location and later brought to the respondent for notarization along with the signatories’ residence certificates.
The respondent denied the allegations, claiming that a couple representing themselves as the Sarmiento spouses personally appeared before him at his residence, signed the deed, and presented their residence certificates. He asserted he acted in good faith, only learning later during a fiscal’s investigation that the woman who signed was the daughter, not the complainant. He pleaded his advanced age and clean record since his 1937 admission to the bar.

ISSUE

Whether or not the respondent committed misconduct by notarizing the deed of sale without the personal appearance of the complainant, thereby making false statements in the acknowledgment.

RULING

Yes, the respondent is guilty of misconduct. The Supreme Court found clear and convincing evidence that the complainant was out of the country on the date of notarization, making her personal appearance before the respondent impossible. The Court rejected the respondent’s defense of good faith, noting several indicia of negligence and falsehood. The residence certificate presented for the complainant was actually issued to “Miss Aida G. Sarmiento,” a single woman born in 1945, which a cursory examination would have revealed did not belong to the married complainant. Furthermore, discrepancies in the details of Severino Sarmiento’s residence certificate as copied by the respondent, and the existing familial relationship (balae) between the respondent and the vendor’s sister, Constancia Reyes, who facilitated the transaction, supported the conclusion that the document was signed elsewhere and merely brought to him for notarization.
By falsely attesting in the acknowledgment that the Sarmiento spouses personally appeared, exhibited their certificates, and acknowledged the deed voluntarily before him, the respondent violated his oath as a lawyer and undermined public confidence in notarized documents. The Court found him guilty of misconduct both as a member of the bar and as a notary public. Considering his advanced age, he was suspended from the practice of law and from acting as a notary public for three months, with a warning for future infractions.