Important That The Acts Complained of Were Committed Before Atty. Garrido Was Admitted To The Practice of Law. The Possession of Good Moral
Important That The Acts Complained of Were Committed Before Atty. Garrido Was Admitted To The Practice of Law. The Possession of Good Moral
sal of her complaint, First, Atty. Garrido admitted that he left Constancia to Immoral conduct involves acts that are willful,
GARRIDO VS. VALENCIA arguing that she wanted to maintain friendly pursue his law studies; thereafter and during the flagrant, or shameless, and that show a moral
relations with Atty. Garrido, who is the father of her marriage, he had romantic relationships with other indifference to the opinion of the upright and
six (6) children. women. He had the gall to represent to this Court respectable members of the community. Immoral
that the study of law was his reason for leaving his conduct is gross when it is so corrupt as to constitute
wife; marriage and the study of law are not mutually a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to be
ISSUES: exclusive. reprehensible to a high degree, or when committed
FACTS: under such scandalous or revolting circumstances as
to shock the community’s sense of decency. We
1. Should the disbarment case against Atty. Second, he misrepresented himself to Maelotisea as make these distinctions as the supreme penalty of
Maelotisea Garrido filed a complaint for disbarment Garrido be dismissed because the alleged a bachelor, when in truth he was already married to disbarment arising from conduct requires grossly
against Atty. Garrido and Atty. Valencia before the immoral acts were committed before he was Constancia. This was a misrepresentation given as an immoral, not simply immoral, conduct.
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Committee on admitted to the Philippine Bar? excuse to lure a woman into a prohibited
Discipline charging them with gross immorality. relationship.
//Maelotisea alleged that she is the legal wife of 2. Whether Atty. Garrido should be disbarred
He did not possess the good moral character required
Atty. Garrido. They have 6 children. Sometime in for gross immoral conduct.
of a lawyer at the time of his admission to the Bar. As
1987, one of their children confided that an unknown RULING: Third, Atty. Garrido contracted his second marriage a lawyer, he violated his lawyer’s oath, Section 20(a)
caller talked with her claiming that the former is a with Maelotisea notwithstanding the subsistence of of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, and Canon 1 of the
child of Atty Garrido. Also, one of her daughter, May his first marriage. This was an open admission, not Code of Professional Responsibility, all of which
Elizabeth, told her that she saw Atty. Garrido strolling 1. Prescription of offenses by the complainant do only of an illegal liaison, but of the commission of a commonly require him to obey the laws of the land.
at a mall together with a woman and a child who was not apply in the determination of a lawyer’s crime.
later identified as Atty. Valencia and Angeli Ramona qualifications and fitness for membership in the Bar.
Valencia Garrido, respectively. //Maelotisea was able Admission to the practice of law is a component of He violated ethical rules of the profession,
to secure the Certificate of Live Birth of the child, the administration of justice and is a matter of public Fourth, Atty. Garrido engaged in an extra-marital specifically, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional
stating among others that the said child is the interest because it involves service to the public. affair with Atty. Valencia while his two marriages Responsibility, which commands that he “shall not
daughter of Atty. Garrido and Atty. Valencia.//In were in place and without taking into consideration engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
1993, Atty. Garrido left the conjugal home and joined the moral and emotional implications of his actions conduct”; Canon 7 of the same Code, which demands
Atty. Valencia at their residence. Since he left the on the two women he took as wives and on his six (6) that “a lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity
conjugal home Atty. Garrido failed and still failing to children by his second marriage. and dignity of the legal profession”; Rule 7.03 of the
The time that elapsed between the immoral acts
give Maelotisea the needed financial support to the Code of Professional Responsibility, which provides
charged and the filing of the complaint is not material
prejudice of their children who stopped schooling that, “a lawyer shall not engage in conduct that
in considering the qualification of Atty. Garrido when Fifth, instead of making legal amends to validate his
because of financial constraints.//By way of defense, adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor
he applied for admission to the practice of law, and marriage with Maelotisea upon the death of
Atty. Garrido alleged that Maelotisea was not his should he, whether in public or private life, behave in
his continuing qualification to be a member of the Constancia, Atty. Garrido married Atty. Valencia who
legal wife, as he was already married to Constancia a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal
legal profession. From this perspective, it is not bore him a daughter.
David (Constancia) when he married Maelotisea. He profession.”
important that the acts complained of were
claimed he married Maelotisea after he and
committed before Atty. Garrido was admitted to the
Constancia parted ways. As he and Maelotisea grew
practice of law. The possession of good moral Sixth, Atty. Garrido misused his legal knowledge and
apart over the years due to financial problems, Atty.
character is both a condition precedent and a convinced Atty. Valencia (who was not then a lawyer)
Garrido met Atty. Valencia. He became close to Atty.
continuing requirement to warrant admission to the that he was free to marry, considering that his
Valencia to whom he confided his difficulties.
bar and to retain membership in the legal marriage with Maelotisea was not “valid.”
Together, they resolved his personal problems and
profession. Admission to the bar does not preclude
his financial difficulties with his second family. Atty.
a subsequent judicial inquiry, upon proper
Garrido denied that he failed to give financial support
complaint, into any question concerning the mental Seventh, as the evidence on record implies, Atty.
to his children with Maelotisea, emphasizing that all
or moral fitness of the respondent before he Garrido married Atty. Valencia in Hongkong in an
his six (6) children were educated in private schools;
became a lawyer (Zaguirre v. Castillo). Admission to apparent attempt to accord legitimacy to a union
all graduated from college except for Arnel Victorino,
the practice only creates the rebuttable presumption entered into while another marriage was in place.
who finished a special secondary course. //Atty.
that the applicant has all the qualifications to become
Garrido emphasized that all his marriages were
a lawyer; this may be refuted by clear and convincing
contracted before he became a member of the bar Eighth, after admission to the practice of law, Atty.
evidence to the contrary even after admission to the
on May 11, 1979, with the third marriage contracted Garrido simultaneously cohabited and had sexual
Bar.
after the death of Constancia on December 26, 1977. relations with two (2) women who at one point were
Likewise, his children with Maelotisea were born both his wedded wives. He also led a double life with
before he became a lawyer.//On her part, Atty. 2. The undisputed facts gathered from the two (2) families for a period of more than ten (10)
Valencia denied that she was the mistress of Atty. evidence and the admissions of Atty. Garrido years.
Garrido. She explained that Maelotisea was not the established a pattern of gross immoral conduct that
legal wife of Atty. Garrido since the marriage warrants his disbarment. His conduct was not only
between them was void from the beginning due to corrupt or unprincipled; it was reprehensible to the By his actions, Garrido committed multiple violations
the then existing marriage of Atty. Garrido with highest degree. relating to the legal profession, specifically, violations
Constancia. //In the course of the hearings before of the bar admission rules, of his lawyer’s oath, and
the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline, Maelotisea of the ethical rules of the profession.