September 16, 2024 | 5:41pm
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court on Monday, September 16 said it suspended a lawyer after he forged his client’s signature and notarized a special power or attorney despite his client being out of the country.
This resulted in the lawyer, Lorenzo Reago, being suspended from the practice of law for two years and also prohibited from being commissioned as a notary public for two years.
He is also directed by the high court to file a manifestation before the Supreme Court to indicate that his suspension has started.
What happened
Complainant Maria Brozas-Garri accused Reago of failing to return her copy of the Transfer Certificate of Title which he borrowed, despite repeated requests.
She also claimed that lawyer Reago prepared a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) allowing his wife to lease out her house and lot and he notarized the document even though her signature was forged, as she was out of the country at the time.
Additionally, the complainant accused Reago of neglecting to file important legal paperwork and failing to provide updates in a case where he was representing her and other plaintiffs.
In his defense, Reago asserted that he already returned the Transfer Certificate Title to Brozas-Garri through her sister in 2016, with proof of receipt.
Reago claimed the Special Power of Attorney was created with her full knowledge and that she agreed to the lease and even received rental payments.
The case was referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for further investigation and recommendations.
The IBP then recommended that Reago should be administratively liable for violating Canon 1 of the old Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) and the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice.
The IBP Board further noted that Reago aggravated his violation by knowingly preparing and notarizing a document with a forged signature while Brozas-Garri was abroad.
Reago then filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied. This prompted him to appeal his case before the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court ruling
The Supreme Court has upheld the findings of the IBP. In its ruling, it stressed that notarization is not a mere formality but an act of significant public interest, converting private documents into public ones, which are admissible in court without further authentication.
The high tribunal highlighted that the act of notarization grants a document full faith and credit, making it crucial for notaries public to strictly adhere to the basic requirements of their duties.
“Notaries public are enjoined to observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance of their duties; otherwise, the confidence of the public in the integrity of this form of conveyance would be undermined,” the Supreme Court’s decision read.
Citing the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, the Court reiterated that a notary public must ensure that the person signing the document is present at the time of notarization and is either personally known to the notary or identified through competent evidence.
It stressed that a notary public should never notarize a document unless the individual who signed it is the same person who appeared before them to affirm the contents of the document.
Any violation of this rule, the Supreme Court said is a violation of the Canon II of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability which replaced the old CPR.
“In this case, Atty. Reago ‘s act of notarizing the SPA even if the signatory did not personally appear before him to affix her signature and acknowledge the same clearly falls short of the yardstick of accuracy and fidelity required of notaries public,“ the high court’s decision read.
“Notably, Atty. Reago never even refuted Brozas-Garri’s allegation but, instead, countered that be and his wife merely exercised acts of administration over Brozas-Garri’ s property, and as such, said SPA was unnecessary and superfluous in the execution of the lease contract over the said property, and Brozas-Garri I was deemed to have ratified the lease considering her acceptance of the benefits from it,” it added.
Being suspended from the practice of law, Reago litigate nor do services of a lawyer for two years. Among these are notarizing documents. He could once again practice law once his suspension is lifted.
Be the first to comment