A.M. No.

1608 August 14, 1981

TITLE:

MAGDALENA T. ARCIGA complainant,

vs.
SEGUNDINO D. MANIWANG respondent.

PONENTE: AQUINO, J.:

FACT:

Magdalena and Segundino got acquainted sometime in October, 1970 at Cebu City.
Segundino was a law student in the San Jose Recoletos College.They became sweethearts
and eventually their relationship grow more intimately and they had sexual congress. When the
respondent asked her why she refused to have sexual intercourse with him on their first date,
she jokingly said that she was in loved with another man and that she had another child with
that man.

In January 1972, Segundino went back to Davao and continued his law study in Davao City,
while Magdalena stayed in Cebu. On January 1973, she discovered that she was pregnant.
The two went to Capiz, hometown of Magdalena. The respondent promised Magdalena’s
father that right after he pass the bar exam he will marry Magdalena.
Segundino passed the bar examinations last April 1975. Unfortunately, she was told that
Segundino was already married. She was broken-hearted and went back to Davao and
Segundino followed her and inflicted physical injuries to her because she made a
confrontation to Segundino’s wife.
Magdalena filed a complaint for the disbarment of the respondent on the ground of
grossly immoral conduct because he refused to fulfil his promise of marriage to her.
ISSUE: Whether or not the conduct of the respondent can be a cause to his disbarment.
RULING:
No, the conduct of the respondent cannot be a cause to his disbarment. Immoral conduct has
been defined as "that conduct which is willful, flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a moral
indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable members of the community" . In this
case, the facts is insufficient to warrant the respondent to his disbarment.

RATIO DECIDENDE:

This Court found that respondent's refusal to marry the complainant was not so corrupt nor
unprincipled as to warrant disbarment.