Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 95 views

    Protacio vs. Atty. Mendoza Case Digest # 2

    Uploaded by

    Shena Tambio
    Complainant alleges that attorney Mendoza notarized falsified documents, including a board resolution where the signature was forged and the person was not present. An investigation found that Mendoza was negligent in his duties as a notary by notarizing documents without the parties present and by failing to submit the documents and notarial records to the court as required. Mendoza was suspended from his notary commission for one year for his negligence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Protacio vs. Atty. Mendoza Case Digest # 2

    Uploaded by

    Shena Tambio
    95 views7 pages
    Complainant alleges that attorney Mendoza notarized falsified documents, including a board resolution where the signature was forged and the person was not present. An investigation found that Mendoza was negligent in his duties as a notary by notarizing documents without the parties present and by failing to submit the documents and notarial records to the court as required. Mendoza was suspended from his notary commission for one year for his negligence.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Protacio Vs. Atty. Mendoza Case Digest # 2

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Complainant alleges that attorney Mendoza notarized falsified documents, including a board resolution where the signature was forged and the person was not present. An investigation found that Mendoza was negligent in his duties as a notary by notarizing documents without the parties present and by failing to submit the documents and notarial records to the court as required. Mendoza was suspended from his notary commission for one year for his negligence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    95 views7 pages

    Protacio vs. Atty. Mendoza Case Digest # 2

    Uploaded by

    Shena Tambio
    Complainant alleges that attorney Mendoza notarized falsified documents, including a board resolution where the signature was forged and the person was not present. An investigation found that Mendoza was negligent in his duties as a notary by notarizing documents without the parties present and by failing to submit the documents and notarial records to the court as required. Mendoza was suspended from his notary commission for one year for his negligence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 7

    Protacio Vs. Atty.

    Mendoza
    Case Digest # 2

    Adm. Case No. 5764, January 13, 2003


    FACTS:
    Complainant filed a complaint for estafa through falsification of public
    documents against the spouses Nobuyasu and Carmencita Nemoto and the
    Metropolitan Land Corporation on March 7, 2001. He claimed that Atty.
    Mendoza as counsel of the spouses in that case had presented in the
    investigation a falsified resolution. Complainant claimed that he did not
    signed the board resolution nor attended the board meeting of the corporation
    on March 30, 1998 and therefore the signature purporting to be his was
    forgery. The Notarial Section of the Regional Trial Court of Manila certified
    that they don’t have a copy of the board resolution because the respondent
    didn’t submit his Notarial Report for March 1998.
    FACTS:
    Furthermore, according to the complainant, the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation
    showed that Nobuyasu was out of the country from March 26-30 and just arrived from
    Japan on March 31, 1998. Therefore, for Nobuyasu, it was impossible for him to have
    attended the board meeting and signed the resolution on the same date. Complainant
    charged that respondent knowingly and maliciously notarized the said board resolution
    without the presence of the party allegedly executing it.

    In addition, there’s another document entitle Deed of Assignment, dated April 2, 1998 and
    appeared to have been also notarized by the respondent. The complainant denied that he
    hadn’t signed the instrument and the Regional Trial Court of Manila again did not have the
    copy of the document because the respondent had not submitted a notarial report for April
    1998.
    FACTS:
    Respondent’s explanation on the resolution, the document was dated March
    30, 1998 because it was prepared that day but signed by the parties on March
    31, 1998 upon the arrival of Nobuyasu. Through inadvertence, respondent
    failed to change the date. He also explained that he failed to submit his
    notarial register and copies of document for 1998 because it was lost when he
    transferred residence.

    Dated November 27, 2001, the Investigating Commissioner of the Integrated


    Bar of the Philippines found that the respondent have been negligent in his
    performance of his duties and obligations as a notary public and
    recommended the revocation of his notarial commission for 2 years.
    ISSUE:
    Is Atty. Mendoza negligent to his duties and responsibilities as
    a Notary Public?
    LEGAL DOCTRINE:
    It is necessary that a party to any document notarized by a Notary Public appear
    in person before the latter and affirm the contents and truths of what are stated
    in the document. Even more serious issue is the respondent’s failure to submit a
    copy of the document with the Regional Trial Court. A notary record or notrail;
    register must always and should be submitted monthly attached the copy of the
    documents the notary public notarized. Respondent’s failure to comply with the
    duty to file a copy of the resolution constitutes a sufficient ground of his
    commission.
    WHEREFORE, respondent is SUSPENDED from his notary commission for 1
    year with a WARNING.
    Presentation Link
    https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1l5PZRjfNn4Wm2Xw0WmdzbV7EmYaGp
    pCkkmcGwIyfbzo/edit?usp=sharing

    You might also like