Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Marcayda vs. Naz Digest

    Uploaded by

    M. CoCo
    73 views1 page
    Salvacion Marcayda filed a complaint to prevent Justiniano Naz from taking his oath as a lawyer due to immorality. Marcayda alleged Naz was the father of her son. Naz initially denied but later admitted and signed a notarized agreement acknowledging paternity and promising child support. Marcayda then dropped her complaint and Naz was allowed to take his oath. However, Naz did not provide support as promised, claiming he was coerced into signing. The Court ruled Naz was not guilty of gross immorality to be disbarred since he acknowledged paternity, but severely reprimanded him for trying to invalidate the child support agreement.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    MARCAYDA VS. NAZ DIGEST

    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
    Salvacion Marcayda filed a complaint to prevent Justiniano Naz from taking his oath as a lawyer due to immorality. Marcayda alleged Naz was the father of her son. Naz initially denied but later admitted and signed a notarized agreement acknowledging paternity and promising child support. Marcayda then dropped her complaint and Naz was allowed to take his oath. However, Naz did not provide support as promised, claiming he was coerced into signing. The Court ruled Naz was not guilty of gross immorality to be disbarred since he acknowledged paternity, but severely reprimanded him for trying to invalidate the child support agreement.

    Copyright:

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

    Marcayda vs. Naz Digest

    Uploaded by

    M. CoCo
    Salvacion Marcayda filed a complaint to prevent Justiniano Naz from taking his oath as a lawyer due to immorality. Marcayda alleged Naz was the father of her son. Naz initially denied but later admitted and signed a notarized agreement acknowledging paternity and promising child support. Marcayda then dropped her complaint and Naz was allowed to take his oath. However, Naz did not provide support as promised, claiming he was coerced into signing. The Court ruled Naz was not guilty of gross immorality to be disbarred since he acknowledged paternity, but severely reprimanded him for trying to invalidate the child support agreement.

    Copyright:

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

    MARCAYDA VS.

    NAZ
    A.M. No. 1856
    October 28, 1983

    FACTS:

    Salvacion E. Marcayda filed a complaint to withhold the oath-taking of respondent


    Justiniano P. Naz on the ground of immorality. Complainant alleged that she had a son with the
    respondent, who the latter, denied at first, but eventually admitted when they executed a
    notarized agreement in Manila. In the agreement, he acknowledged the paternity and
    promised to give support to the child. Because of this promise to support, Marcayda dropped
    the complaint against Naz who was then allowed to take his oath. But Naz did not live up to his
    promise and alleged that he was "coerced" to sign the agreement of support.

    ISSUE: Whether or not Naz should be disbarred because of his conduct.

    RULING:

    NO. The Court ruled that Naz is not guilty of gross immorality. He should not be
    disbarred because he had admitted the paternity of Rey in a public document and agreed to
    support him. This circumstance rendered his immorality not so gross and scandalous. But his
    stand of not giving any value to that public document shows a certain unscrupulousness
    unbecoming a member of a noble profession. It is tantamount to self-stultification. Thus, he
    was severely reprimanded for his attempt to nullify the notarial agreement to support a child
    whose filiation he had admitted.

    You might also like