3/9/2017 A.M. No.

3249

TodayisThursday,March09,2017

Custom Search

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila

ENBANC

A.M.No.3249November29,1989

SALVACIONDELIZOCORDOVA,complainant,
vs.
ATTY.LAURENCED.CORDOVA,respondent.

RESOLUTION

PERCURIAM:

Inanunswornlettercomplaintdated14April1988addressedtothenMr.ChiefJusticeClaudioTeehankee,
complainantSalvacionDelizochargedherhusband,Atty.LaurenceD.Cordova,withimmoralityandacts
unbecomingamemberoftheBar.ThelettercomplaintwasforwardedbytheCourttotheIntegratedBarofthe
Philippines,CommissiononBarDiscipline("Commission"),forinvestigation,reportandrecommendation.

TheCommission,beforeactingonthecomplaint,requiredcomplainanttosubmitaverifiedcomplaintwithinten(10)
daysfromnotice.ComplainantcompliedandsubmittedtotheCommissionon27September1988arevisedand
verifiedversionofherlonganddetailedcomplaintagainstherhusbandcharginghimwithimmoralityandacts
unbecomingamemberoftheBar.

InanOrderoftheCommissiondated1December1988,respondentwasdeclaredindefaultforfailuretofilean
answertothecomplaintwithinfifteen(15)daysfromnotice.ThesameOrderrequiredcomplainanttosubmitbefore
theCommissionherevidenceexparte,on16December1988.Uponthetelegraphicrequestofcomplainantforthe
resettingofthe16December1988hearing,theCommissionscheduledanotherhearingon25January1989.The
hearingscheduledfor25January1989wasrescheduledtwo(2)moretimesfirst,for25February1989andsecond,
for10and11April1989.Thehearingsnevertookplaceascomplainantfailedtoappear.RespondentCordova
nevermovedtosetasidetheorderofdefault,eventhoughnoticesofthehearingsscheduledweresenttohim.

Inatelegraphicmessagedated6April1989,complainantinformedtheCommissionthatsheandherhusbandhad
already"reconciled".Inanorderdated17April1989,theCommissionrequiredtheparties(respondentand
complainant)toappearbeforeitforconfirmationandexplanationofthetelegraphicmessageandrequiredthemto
fileaformalmotiontodismissthecomplaintwithinfifteen(15)daysfromnotice.Neitherpartyrespondedand
nothingwasheardfromeitherpartysincethen.

ComplainanthavingfailedtosubmitherevidenceexpartebeforetheCommission,theIBPBoardofGovernors
submittedtothisCourtitsreportreprimandingrespondentforhisacts,admonishinghimthatanyfurtheractsof
immoralityinthefuturewillbedealtwithmoreseverely,andorderinghimtosupporthislegitimatefamilyasa
responsibleparentshould.

ThefindingsoftheIBPBoardofGovernorsmaybesummedupasfollows:

ComplainantandrespondentCordovaweremarriedon6June1976andoutofthismarriage,two(2)childrenwere
born.In1985,thecouplelivedsomewhereinQuirinoProvince.Inthatyear,respondentCordovalefthisfamilyas
wellashisjobasBranchClerkofCourtoftheRegionalTrialCourt,Cabarroguis,QuirinoProvince,andwentto
Mangagoy,Bislig,SurigaodelSurwithoneFelyG.Holgado.FelyG.Holgadowasherselfmarriedandleftherown
husbandandchildrentostaywithrespondent.RespondentCordovaandFelyG.HolgadolivedtogetherinBisligas
husbandandwife,withrespondentCordovaintroducingFelytothepublicashiswife,andFelyHolgadousingthe
nameFelyCordova.RespondentCordovagaveFelyHolgadofundswithwhichtoestablishasarisaristoreinthe
publicmarketatBislig,whileatthesametimefailingtosupporthislegitimatefamily.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/nov1989/am_3249_1989.html 1/3
3/9/2017 A.M. No. 3249
On6April1986,respondentCordovaandhiscomplainantwifehadanapparentreconciliation.Respondent
promisedthathewouldseparatefromFelyHolgadoandbroughthislegitimatefamilytoBislig,SurigaodelSur.
Respondentwould,however,frequentlycomehomefrombeerhousesorcabarets,drunk,andcontinuedtoneglect
thesupportofhislegitimatefamily.InFebruary1987,complainantfound,uponreturningfromatriptoManila
necessitatedbyhospitalizationofherdaughterLoraine,thatrespondentCordovawasnolongerlivingwithher
(complainant's)childrenintheirconjugalhomethatrespondentCordovawaslivingwithanothermistress,one
LuisitaMagallanes,andhadtakenhisyoungerdaughterMelaniealongwithhim.Respondentandhisnewmistress
hidMelaniefromthecomplinant,compellingcomplainanttogotocourtandtotakebackherdaughterbyhabeas
corpus.TheRegionalTrialCourt,Bislig,gavehercustodyoftheirchildren.

Notwithstandingrespondent'spromisestoreform,hecontinuedtolivewithLuisitaMagallanesasherhusbandand
continuedtofailtogivesupporttohislegitimatefamily.

FinallytheCommissionreceivedatelegrammessageapparentlyfromcomplainant,statingthatcomplainantand
respondenthadbeenreconciledwitheachother.

Afterareviewoftherecord,weagreewiththefindingsoffactoftheIBPBoard.Wealsoagreethatthemostrecent
reconciliationbetweencomplainantandrespondent,assumingthesametobereal,doesnotexcuseandwipeaway
themisconductandimmoralbehavioroftherespondentcarriedoutinpublic,andnecessarilyadverselyreflecting
uponhimasamemberoftheBaranduponthePhilippineBaritself.Anapplicantforadmissiontomembershipin
thebarisrequiredtoshowthatheispossessedofgoodmoralcharacter.Thatrequirementisnotexhaustedand
dispensedwithuponadmissiontomembershipofthebar.Onthecontrary,thatrequirementpersistsasacontinuing
conditionformembershipintheBaringoodstanding.

InMortelv.Aspiras,1thisCourt,followingtheruleintheUnitedStates,heldthat"thecontinuedpossession...ofagood
moralcharacterisarequisiteconditionfortherightfulcontinuanceinthepracticeofthelaw...anditslossrequires
suspensionordisbarment,eventhoughthestatutesdonotspecifythatasagroundfordisbarment."2Itisimportanttonote
thatthelackofmoralcharacterthatwehererefertoasessentialisnotlimitedtogoodmoralcharacterrelatingtothe
dischargeofthedutiesandresponsibilitiesofanattorneyatlaw.Themoraldelinquencythataffectsthefitnessofamember
ofthebartocontinueassuchincludesconductthatoutragesthegenerallyacceptedmoralstandardsofthecommunity,
conductforinstance,whichmakes"amockeryoftheinviolablesocialinstitutionormarriage."3InMortel,therespondent
beingalreadymarried,wooedandwontheheartofasingle,21yearoldteacherwhosubsequentlycohabitedwithhimand
borehimason.Becauserespondent'sconductinMortelwasparticularlymorallyrepulsive,involvingthemarryingofhis
mistresstohisownsonandthereaftercohabitingwiththewifeofhisownsonafterthemarriagehehadhimselfarranged,
respondentwasdisbarred.

InRoyongv.Oblena,4therespondentwasdeclaredunfittocontinueasamemberofthebarbyreasonofhisimmoral
conductandaccordinglydisbarred.Hewasfoundtohaveengagedinsexualrelationswiththecomplainantwho
consequentlyborehimasonandtohavemaintainedforanumberofyearsanadulterousrelationshipwithanotherwoman.

Intheinstantcase,respondentCordovamaintainedforabouttwo(2)yearsanadulterousrelationshipwitha
marriedwomannothiswife,infullviewofthegeneralpublic,tothehumiliationanddetrimentofhislegitimatefamily
whichhe,rubbingsaltonthewound,failedorrefusedtosupport.Afterabriefperiodof"reform"respondenttookup
againwithanotherwomannothiswife,cohabitingwithherandbringingalonghisyoungdaughtertolivewiththem.
Clearly,respondentflauntedhisdisregardofthefundamentalinstitutionofmarriageanditselementaryobligations
beforehisowndaughterandthecommunityatlarge.

WHEREFORE,theCourtResolvedtoSUSPENDrespondentfromthepracticeoflawindefinitelyanduntilfarther
ordersfromthisCourt.TheCourtwillconsiderliftinghissuspensionwhenrespondentCordovasubmitsproof
satisfactorytotheCommissionandthisCourtthathehasandcontinuestoprovideforthesupportofhislegitimate
familyandthathehasgivenuptheimmoralcourseofconductthathehasclungto.

Fernan,C.J.,Narvasa,Gutierrez,Jr.,Cruz,Paras,Feliciano,Gancayco,Padilla,Bidin,Sarmiento,Cortes,Grio
Aquino,MedialdeaandRegalado,JJ.,concur.

MelencioHerrera,J.,isonleave.

Footnotes

l100Phil.586(1956).

2100Phil.at592.

3100Phil.a,593.

4117Phil.865(1963).

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/nov1989/am_3249_1989.html 2/3
3/9/2017 A.M. No. 3249

TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/nov1989/am_3249_1989.html 3/3