Lawyer Suspended for Signing Falsified Deed in Family Property Sale

The Supreme Court has reminded all lawyers that their duty to uphold the law cannot be set aside to accommodate a client's wishes, even for seemingly laudable family purposes. In Jimeno v. Jimeno (A.C. No. 12012, July 2, 2018), the Court suspended a lawyer for six months for signing a deed of absolute sale that contained patent falsehoods, including the signature of a person who had already died.

The case serves as a stern warning: a lawyer who knowingly becomes a party to a document with false statements—even without preparing it—violates the Lawyer's Oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility.

The Facts

Complainant Geronimo J. Jimeno, Jr. discovered that his cousin, Atty. Flordeliza M. Jimeno, had sold a property owned by his late parents through a Deed of Absolute Sale dated September 8, 2005. The respondent signed the deed as attorney-in-fact of Geronimo Sr., who had authorized her to administer and sell his real properties in the Philippines.

The complainant alleged the deed was falsified because it bore the signature of his mother, Perla, who had died on May 19, 2004—more than a year before the deed was executed. The deed also erroneously described Geronimo Sr. as married to Perla (when he was already a widower), made him appear as the absolute owner (when the property was co-owned with his ten children), and stated a wrong residence and postal address.

The Issue

The central question was whether the respondent should be held administratively liable for her participation in the sale despite claiming she did not prepare the documents and acted in good faith.

The Ruling

The Supreme Court found the respondent guilty of violating the Lawyer's Oath, Rule 1.01 of Canon 1, Rule 15.07 of Canon 15, and Rule 19.01 of Canon 19 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. She was suspended from the practice of law for six months.

The Court emphasized that a lawyer's duty to be honest and truthful is clear and unambiguous. While the respondent claimed she had no hand in preparing the documents, the Court held this was "of no moment." As a lawyer, she was expected to respect and abide by the law, and she was fully aware of the requisites for a valid conveyance of property.

The Court noted several patent irregularities that should have alerted the respondent: the deed bore the signature of a deceased person, described the seller's civil status incorrectly, and stated the wrong address. Instead of advising the family to settle the estate of Perla first—which would have allowed proper registration of the property before the sale—she voluntarily signed the deed.

The Court rejected her defenses of good faith and reliance on assurances from the Jimeno children. "As a lawyer, she cannot invoke good faith and good intentions as justifications to excuse her from discharging her obligation to be truthful and honest in her professional actions," the Court stated.

Practical Takeaways

• A lawyer's duty to uphold the law overrides client instructions. Even if a client insists on a transaction, a lawyer must not participate in any document containing falsehoods or inaccuracies.
• Ignorance of document preparation is not a defense. Signing a document with patent irregularities makes a lawyer liable, even if someone else drafted it.
• Spot-check documents for obvious errors. Lawyers should verify names, civil status, addresses, and ownership details before affixing their signatures.
• Advise clients on the proper legal process. When a property is co-owned or subject to estate settlement, the lawyer must guide the client through the correct legal steps—not shortcut them.
• Good faith is not a shield. The Court will not excuse misconduct simply because the lawyer believed the client's intentions were honest or the family consented to the sale.

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