FACTS: 
A disbarment case was importance of adherence to said
filed against Atty. Llosa by Pike P.
Arrieta for allegedly notarizing a
Deed of Absolute sale, wherein,
vendors noted were already dead
prior to its execution. In answer,
respondent admitted having
notarized the Deed of Absolute
Sale. But before affixing his
notarial seal, he first ascertained
the authenticity of the signatures,
verified the identities of the
signatories, and determined the
voluntariness of its execution.
However, in a later date, the
respondent sought to dismiss the
disbarment case admitting to the
fact the instant case is only a
product of misunderstanding and
misinterpretation of some facts
and is now convinced that
everything is in order. The
designated Investigating
Commissioner of the IBP
recommended the dismissal of
the instant case. The Board of
Governors of the IBP adopted the
above recommendation and
resolved to dismiss the instant
case after finding no compelling
reason to continue with the
disbarment proceedings.
ISSUE: Whether or not Atty. Joel
A. Llosa be disbarred or
suspended from practice of law.
HELD: YES. Respondent ordered
SUSPENDED for six months from
practice of law with a warning
that another infraction will be
dealt with more severely. Citing
Section 1 of Public Act No. 2103
also known as the Notarial law,
the Supreme Court explained the
law as part of the responsibility of
a duly deputized authority to
conduct such notarial process.
Due diligence is to be observed,
this being part of a lawyers
professional responsibility and
procedural lapse is not an excuse
to cater to the convenience of
clients. Any violation is
tantamount to misconduct. Such
misconduct is a ground for
disbarment as stated by the
Section 27 of Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court. Furthermore, the
Supreme Court stressed the
primary responsibility of lawyers
as stated in Canon I of the Code
of Professional Responsibility that
a lawyer shall uphold the
Constitution, obey the laws of the
land and promote respect for law
and legal processes. A lawyer
must also refrain from engaging
in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct. Any violation of
his oath or of his duties as an
attorney and counsellor, which
include statutory grounds
enumerated in Section 27, Rule
138 of the Rules of Court, all of
these being broad enough to
cover practically any misconduct
of a lawyer in his professional or
private capacity may be disbarred
or suspended.
ACCORDINGLY, this Court finds
respondent Atty. Joel A. Llosa
guilty of misconduct.
Consequently, he is
ordered SUSPENDED from the
practice of law for six (6) months
effective immediately, with a
warning that another infraction
would be dealt with more
severely.