Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Abella vs. Atty. Cruzabra

    Uploaded by

    Jolynne Anne Gatica
    7 views1 page
    Atty. Cruzabra was the Deputy Register of Deeds of General Santos City and was also commissioned as a public notary, notarizing around 3,000 documents. She did not obtain written authorization from the Department of Justice to engage in private practice as required. While the Register of Deeds may have verbally approved her notary work, written permission from the DOJ Secretary was still needed. As Atty. Cruzabra failed to present proof of the required written authorization, her notarial commission was ruled invalid.

    Original Description:

    Notarial Practice Rule - Case Digests

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Atty. Cruzabra was the Deputy Register of Deeds of General Santos City and was also commissioned as a public notary, notarizing around 3,000 documents. She did not obtain written authorization from the Department of Justice to engage in private practice as required. While the Register of Deeds may have verbally approved her notary work, written permission from the DOJ Secretary was still needed. As Atty. Cruzabra failed to present proof of the required written authorization, her notarial commission was ruled invalid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views1 page

    Abella vs. Atty. Cruzabra

    Uploaded by

    Jolynne Anne Gatica
    Atty. Cruzabra was the Deputy Register of Deeds of General Santos City and was also commissioned as a public notary, notarizing around 3,000 documents. She did not obtain written authorization from the Department of Justice to engage in private practice as required. While the Register of Deeds may have verbally approved her notary work, written permission from the DOJ Secretary was still needed. As Atty. Cruzabra failed to present proof of the required written authorization, her notarial commission was ruled invalid.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    Abella vs. Atty.

    Cruzabra
    A.C. NO. 5688, June 4, 2009
    Carpio, J.

    DOCTRINE: Public officials and employees are prohibited to engage in the private practice of
    their profession unless authorized by the Constitution or law, provided, that such practice will
    not conflict or tend to conflict with their official functions.

    FACTS: Atty. Cruzabra was the appointed Deputy Register of Deeds of General Santos City
    when a complaint for violation of Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Sec.
    7(b)(2) of RA No. 6713 was filed against him by Abella. It was alleged that while being the
    Deputy Register of Deeds, Atty. Cruzabra was also a commissioned public notary notarizing
    some 3,000 documents without first obtaining authority from the DOJ (engaged in private
    practice while employed in the government service). Atty. Cruzabra countered that she was
    authorized by her superior, the Register of Deeds, to act as a notary public. The Investigating
    Commissioner recommended the dismissal of the complaint against Atty. Cruzabra for lack of
    merit. The IBP Board of Governors adopted the Report and dismissed the case. Hence, this case.

    ISSUE: Whether Atty. Cruzabra’s notarial commission is valid.

    RULING: NO.

    Section 7(b)(2) of RA 6713 provides that public officials and employees are prohibited to
    engage in the private practice of their profession unless authorized by the Constitution or law,
    provided, that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with their official functions.

    Similarly, Memorandum Circular No. 17 of the Executive Department allows government


    employees to engage directly in the private practice of their profession provided there is a
    written permission from the Department head.

    It is clear that when respondent filed her petition for commission as a notary public, she did not
    obtain a written permission from the Secretary of the DOJ. Respondent's superior, the Register
    of Deeds, cannot issue any authorization because he is not the head of the Department. And even
    assuming that the Register of Deeds authorized her, respondent failed to present any proof of
    that written permission. Respondent cannot feign ignorance or good faith because respondent
    filed her petition for commission as a notary public after Memorandum Circular No. 17 was
    issued in 1986.

    Under the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, engaging in the private
    practice of profession, when unauthorized, is classified as a light offense punishable by
    reprimand.

    You might also like