Accountability for False Statements: Attorney Suspended for Misleading Forum Shopping Certifications

In a significant administrative case, the Supreme Court held a lawyer accountable for making false declarations in certifications against forum shopping and for malpractice as a notary public. The case underscores the separate and independent nature of the certification requirement from the prohibition against forum shopping itself, and the serious consequences for lawyers who violate this rule.

The Case of Atty. Philip Z. A. Nazareno

The complainants were individual purchasers of housing units in a subdivision in Cavite. Due to alleged construction defects, they sought rescission of their contracts to sell before the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB). Rudex International Development Corp., the developer, was represented in these cases by respondent Atty. Philip Z. A. Nazareno.

After judgments of default were rendered against Rudex in the first batch of rescission cases, Rudex filed petitions for review before the HLURB. In the certifications against forum shopping attached to these petitions, Rudex and Atty. Nazareno stated that no similar action or proceeding was pending—despite the fact that Rudex had previously filed an ejectment case against one of the complainants and her husband.

Subsequently, Rudex filed additional complaints for rescission and ejectment against the complainants. The certifications against forum shopping attached to these complaints similarly declared that no similar actions were pending, even though related cases were already before the HLURB and the courts. Atty. Nazareno notarized these certifications himself.

The Separate Nature of the Certification Requirement

The Court distinguished between the prohibition against forum shopping and the certification requirement against forum shopping. Compliance with the certification is separate from and independent of avoiding forum shopping itself. Failure to comply with the certification requirement is a ground for dismissal of the case without prejudice, while violation of the prohibition against forum shopping is a ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and direct contempt.

Violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility

The Court found that Atty. Nazareno's false declarations violated Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits lawyers from engaging in unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct. The Court also cited Rule 10.01, Canon 10, which requires lawyers to owe candor, fairness, and good faith to the court and prohibits them from doing any falsehood.

Notarial Malpractice

The Court also found Atty. Nazareno guilty of malpractice as a notary public. He assigned only one document number to the certifications attached to six separate complaints, when each should have been treated as a separate notarial act. Worse, he notarized certifications that he knew contained false statements.

The Court emphasized that notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act. It is invested with substantive public interest, and a notarial document is entitled to full faith and credit upon its face. When a notary public is a lawyer, a graver responsibility is placed upon him by reason of his solemn oath to obey the laws and to do no falsehood.

Practical takeaways

• Lawyers must truthfully declare the existence of any pending related cases in certifications against forum shopping, even if the cases involve different parties or causes of action.
• The certification requirement against forum shopping is separate from the prohibition against forum shopping; violating either carries distinct consequences.
• A lawyer who knowingly makes false statements in pleadings or notarized documents faces administrative sanctions, including suspension from the practice of law.
• Notaries public must treat each notarial act separately and record each document properly in their notarial register.
• The Court may impose penalties more severe than those recommended by the IBP when the lawyer's infractions are repetitive and willful.

The Court suspended Atty. Nazareno from the practice of law for one year, revoked his notarial commission, and permanently disqualified him from being commissioned as a notary public. The decision serves as a stern reminder that lawyers who make false declarations in certifications against forum shopping and abuse their notarial powers will face serious consequences.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.