Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Perez VS CATINDIG

    Uploaded by

    lavenderstrawberry
    5 views2 pages
    This case involved Attorney Tristan Catindig who entered into two marriages - the first to avoid jeopardizing his scholarship and the second while still legally married. He obtained a divorce decree from the Dominican Republic to marry his friend Dr. Elmar Perez in Virginia but their marriage was void under Philippine law. When Dr. Perez discovered Catindig's affair and plans to marry his mistress, she filed a complaint. The court found Catindig guilty of gross immorality for deliberately disregarding the sanctity of marriage through his actions and disbarred him from practicing law. The charges against Catindig's mistress were dismissed for lack of evidence.

    Original Description:

    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
    This case involved Attorney Tristan Catindig who entered into two marriages - the first to avoid jeopardizing his scholarship and the second while still legally married. He obtained a divorce decree from the Dominican Republic to marry his friend Dr. Elmar Perez in Virginia but their marriage was void under Philippine law. When Dr. Perez discovered Catindig's affair and plans to marry his mistress, she filed a complaint. The court found Catindig guilty of gross immorality for deliberately disregarding the sanctity of marriage through his actions and disbarred him from practicing law. The charges against Catindig's mistress were dismissed for lack of evidence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    5 views2 pages

    Perez VS CATINDIG

    Uploaded by

    lavenderstrawberry
    This case involved Attorney Tristan Catindig who entered into two marriages - the first to avoid jeopardizing his scholarship and the second while still legally married. He obtained a divorce decree from the Dominican Republic to marry his friend Dr. Elmar Perez in Virginia but their marriage was void under Philippine law. When Dr. Perez discovered Catindig's affair and plans to marry his mistress, she filed a complaint. The court found Catindig guilty of gross immorality for deliberately disregarding the sanctity of marriage through his actions and disbarred him from practicing law. The charges against Catindig's mistress were dismissed for lack of evidence.

    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 2

    Perez v. Catindig A.C. No.

    5816

    Facts:

    Attorney Tristan Catindig (Attorney Catindig) entered into two marriages

    with Lily Corazon Gomez in 1968. He confessed that he had married her

    solely due to her pregnancy and to avoid jeopardizing his scholarship at

    Harvard Law School. In 1983, while reconnecting with his old friend Dr.

    Elmar Perez (Dr. Perez), he began to court her. Subsequently, Attorney

    Catindig obtained a divorce decree from the Dominican Republic and

    assured Dr. Perez of its legality. Consequently, they married in Virginia,

    USA, and had a child together. Later on, Dr. Perez discovered that their

    marriage was void under Philippine law due to the unrecognized divorce

    decree. Attorney Catindig promised to rectify the situation and legally adopt

    their son.

    However, in 2001, Dr. Perez received an anonymous letter revealing

    Attorney Catindig's affair with Attorney Karen Baydo (Attorney Baydo).

    Additionally, Dr. Perez found a love letter from Attorney Catindig to Attorney

    Baydo, expressing his intention to marry her once his "impediment is

    removed." That same year, Attorney Catindig abandoned Dr. Perez and

    their son, relocating to a luxurious condominium in Makati City where

    Attorney Baydo was frequently seen.

    The Investigating Commissioner issued a Report and Recommendation

    advocating for Attorney Catindig's disbarment on grounds of gross

    immorality and violations of Rule 1.01, Canon 7, and Rule 7.03 of the Code

    of Professional Responsibility. Conversely, the Investigating Commissioner

    recommended the dismissal of charges against Attorney Baydo due to

    insufficient evidence. The IBP Board of Governors subsequently issued a

    Resolution adopting and endorsing the Investigating Commissioner's

    recommendations.

    Issue: Whether or not the respondents committed gross immorality, which


    would warrant their disbarment.

    Held:

    A lawyer may face suspension or debarment for engaging in any

    misconduct that demonstrates a deficiency in their moral character,

    honesty, probity, or good behavior. Entering into a marriage while another

    one is still valid constitutes highly immoral behavior. Immoral conduct

    reaches a gross level when it is so corrupt that it amounts to a criminal act,

    so lacking in principles that it is extremely reprehensible, or when carried

    out in such scandalous or shocking circumstances that it offends the

    community's sense of decency.

    Atty. Catindig's subsequent marriage while his previous one was still in

    effect clearly reflects a deliberate disregard for the sanctity of marriage and

    the marital commitments safeguarded by the Constitution and upheld by

    our legal system. By his own admission, Atty. Catindig made a mockery of

    the institution of marriage, exploiting his legal expertise in the process. This

    demonstrated a regrettable lack of the level of morality expected of a

    member of the legal profession, justifying the imposition of the penalty of

    disbarment.

    WHEREFORE, Atty. Tristan A. Catindig is found guilty of gross immorality

    and of violating the Lawyer’s Oath and Rule 1.01, Canon 7 and Rule 7.03

    of the Code of Professional Responsibility and is hereby disbarred from the

    practice of law. The charge of gross immorality against Atty. Karen E.

    Baydo is hereby dismissed for lack of evidence.

    You might also like