Notarial Responsibilities and Lawyer Ethics: Lessons from Rivera v. Dalangin

The Supreme Court's 2020 decision in Rivera v. Dalangin (A.C. No. 12724) serves as a pointed reminder that lawyers who notarize documents must exercise utmost care and integrity. The case underscores that a notary public's duties extend beyond merely witnessing signatures—they include verifying the lawfulness of the transaction and protecting the rights of all parties involved.

The Case Background

Sylvia Rivera, the surviving spouse of the late Teofilo Rivera, and Nicasio Rivera, Teofilo's son from another relationship, were involved in a legal dispute over a parcel of land registered under Teofilo's name. After initial losses in the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals, the pair sought the assistance of Atty. Bayani Dalangin, who successfully helped them secure a favorable ruling and subsequently filed motions for execution of judgment.

Later, Sylvia discovered that Nicasio and his wife Emily had executed an Affidavit of Self-Adjudication with Sale involving the property, selling it to third parties for P100,000.00. A Deed of Absolute Sale dated May 28, 2009, with a stated consideration of P4,000,000.00, had been notarized by Atty. Dalangin—the same lawyer who had previously represented Sylvia and Nicasio in their case.

The Issues Raised

Sylvia filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. Dalangin, alleging deceit and dishonesty. She claimed that Atty. Dalangin was aware of her interest in the property, yet proceeded to notarize a deed that excluded her as a compulsory heir. She also alleged that the deed was antedated to prevent her from recovering the property through consignment of payment.

Atty. Dalangin denied that Sylvia was his client, insisting that only Nicasio had hired his services. He also maintained that he had no knowledge of Sylvia's status as Teofilo's lawful wife and that the deed was not antedated.

The Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court found Atty. Dalangin guilty of violating Canons 1 and 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, as well as the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice.

The Court rejected Atty. Dalangin's denial of representing Sylvia. The pleadings he filed clearly identified the "plaintiffs" without distinguishing between Sylvia and Nicasio. The Court observed that there was no way Atty. Dalangin could forget that Sylvia was his client, given that he filed motions for execution and clarification on behalf of both plaintiffs.

More significantly, the Court held that Atty. Dalangin should have refused to notarize the deed. Under the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, a notary public shall not perform a notarial act if the notary knows or has good reason to believe that the notarial act or transaction is unlawful or immoral. Since Sylvia, as the surviving spouse, was a compulsory heir under the Civil Code, the transaction that excluded her disregarded the rules on succession. The Court noted that a widow or widower who survives with illegitimate children is entitled to one-half of the inheritance, with the illegitimate children entitled to the other half.

The Court also found that Atty. Dalangin failed to timely submit his notarial reports—submitting them 43 months late. The Rules on Notarial Practice requires notaries to forward certified copies of monthly entries to the Clerk of Court within the first ten days of the following month.

However, the Court did not find sufficient evidence that Atty. Dalangin antedated the deed, noting that notarial registers enjoy a presumption of regularity absent contrary evidence.

Penalty Imposed

The Court revoked Atty. Dalangin's notarial commission immediately, disqualified him from being commissioned as a notary public for two years, and suspended him from the practice of law for six months.

Practical Takeaways

• A notary public must refuse to notarize any document when the transaction appears unlawful or immoral, even if all parties are present and willing.
• Lawyers cannot compartmentalize their duties—representing one party in a case does not excuse disregarding the rights of other parties to the same property.
• Notarial commissions carry strict reporting obligations. Failure to submit notarial reports on time is itself a violation of the Rules on Notarial Practice.
• The presumption of regularity of notarial registers protects notaries from unsubstantiated claims of antedating, but this presumption can be overcome by clear evidence.
• In disciplinary proceedings, the focus is on the lawyer's fitness to practice law, not on resolving the underlying property dispute, which must be addressed in separate civil actions.

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