IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR DISBARMENT OF TELESFORO A.

DIAO,
vs.
SEVERINO G. MARTINEZ, petitioner.

Facts:
Respondent had passed the Bar in 1953. However, two years later, petitioner charged
him with having falsely represented in his application for such Bar examination of his requisite
academic qualifications.

Petitioner’s Contention:
Petitioner alleges that respondent had not completed the required pre-legal education
prescribed by the Department of Private Education, these being: (a) his high school training;
and (b) that he never obtained a diploma from Quisumbing College, contradicting the
credentials he had submitted in his application.

Respondent’s Contention:
Respondent answers that, though the first charge is true, he entered service in the U.S.
Army and passed the General Classification Test which, according to him is equivalent to a high
school diploma. He answered the second issue by stating that he was erroneously certified due
to confusion as a graduate of Quisumbing College.

Issue:
Whether or not petitioner was qualified to take the bar examinations.

Decision:
No. The “error” or “confusion” was his own making. The Rules provide, “That previous
to the study of law, he had successfully and satisfactorily completed the required pre-legal
education as prescribed by the Department of Private Education. He started his law studies six
months before obtaining his college degree. Petitioner, though unqualified, was able to take
the Bar examinations due to false representations and must be revoked. Passing the exam is
not the only qualification to become an attorney-at-law but also, that he had taken the
prescribed courses of legal study in the regular manner.