G.R. No. A.M. No. 533; April 29, 1968
Case Parties: IN RE: FLORENCIO MALLARE.

FACTS

The respondent, Florencio Mallare, was admitted to the Philippine Bar on March 5, 1962. In his 1961 verified petition to take the bar examinations, he alleged he was a Filipino citizen, with Filipino parents, Esteban Mallare and Te Na. On July 16, 1962, the Acting Commissioner of Immigration, Martiniano P. Vivo, denounced Mallare to the Supreme Court as a Chinese national masquerading as a Filipino and requested an investigation and the striking of his name from the roll of attorneys. The Court referred the matter for investigation.
Mallare claimed Filipino citizenship based on two theories: (1) that his father, Esteban Mallare, was a Filipino citizen by choice, being the illegitimate son of a Chinese father and a Filipina mother, Ana Mallare, and that his Chinese mother, Te Na, followed her husband’s citizenship upon marriage; and (2) that his Filipino citizenship was conclusively established by a final 1960 judgment of the Court of First Instance of Quezon in Civil Case No. 329-G (Itable vs. Mallare) and by a final order in Special Proceeding No. 3925 correcting his birth record from Chinese to Filipino.
Complainant Vivo disputed the first theory on factual grounds. Regarding the second theory, Vivo claimed Civil Case No. 329-G was a simulated action designed to obtain a judicial declaration of Philippine citizenship, which Mallare and his siblings then used to change their birth and alien registrations to conceal their true Chinese nationality. Mallare denied simulation and argued the judgments were not subject to collateral attack.
The investigation revealed: Evidence regarding Esteban Mallare’s parentage was insufficient to establish Ana Mallare as a Filipina under the law. Documents presented by Mallare (a 1926 landing certificate describing Te Na as wife of a “P.I. citizen,” a 1939 affidavit by Esteban claiming Filipino election, and Esteban’s 1928 voter registration) were given little weight or were deemed insufficient to prove citizenship. Contrarily, all five children of Esteban and Te Na, including Florencio, were registered at birth as children of Chinese parents born in China. Esteban Mallare himself signed his daughter Esperanza’s 1939 birth certificate stating he was Chinese. Esteban’s death certificate, signed by his son Artemio, listed him as a Chinese national. The entire family was registered as aliens in 1942. Florencio Mallare himself registered as an alien in 1950, stating he was Chinese. The Court found the evidence preponderantly showed Esteban Mallare was and remained Chinese; thus, his children, including respondent, were Chinese nationals.
Regarding the judgments, the Court found marks of simulation in Civil Case No. 329-G, noting it appeared brought to circumvent a previous unfavorable opinion from the Secretary of Justice. The plaintiff-vendor essentially abandoned the case, and the defendants (the Mallares) presented unchallenged evidence. The declaration of their Filipino citizenship was merely an incident to adjudicating land ownership, not the direct subject of adjudication. The proceeding for correction of birth records was not an in rem proceeding binding the state, and the fiscal’s appearance was unauthorized. Neither case provided adequate publication to contest the citizenship claim.

ISSUE

Whether Florencio Mallare is a Filipino citizen and therefore rightfully admitted to the practice of law.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court revoked Florencio Mallare’s admission to the Philippine Bar and excluded him from the practice of law.
The Court held that the evidence clearly preponderated, if not overwhelmingly established, that Mallare’s father, Esteban Mallare, was and remained a Chinese national. Consequently, Mallare’s mother, a Chinese, retained her original citizenship, and their offspring, including respondent Florencio Mallare, were Chinese nationals by jus sanguinis (right of blood).
The Court ruled that the judgments in Civil Case No. 329-G and Special Proceeding No. 3925 did not constitute res judicata on the issue of citizenship. The declaration of Filipino citizenship in the civil case was not the thing directly adjudicated but a necessary premise for deciding the validity of a land sale, and the proceeding was in personam. The correction proceeding was not in rem and the state had not consented to be a party; thus, the fiscal’s appearance was unauthorized. Neither case was a mode of acquiring citizenship, and the lack of adequate publication meant the findings were not conclusive on the nationality issue.
The Supreme Court, exercising its inherent and constitutional authority over the admission of lawyers, is not precluded from independently inquiring into a lawyer’s citizenship, regardless of other courts’ findings.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
Respondent Florencio Mallare is declared excluded from the practice of law; his admission to the Philippine Bar is revoked, and he is ordered to return immediately his lawyer’s diploma to the Court. Copies of the decision were ordered furnished to the Secretary of Justice and the Local Civil Registrar of Macalelon, Quezon.