Lee vs Tambago, 544 SCRA 393, February 12, 2008

Facts: 

Complainant, Manuel L. Lee, charged respondent, Atty. Regino B. Tambago, with violation of
Notarial Law and the Ethics of the legal profession for notarizing a will that is alleged to be
spurious in nature in containing forged signatures of his father, the decedent, Vicente Lee Sr.
and two other witnesses, which were also questioned for the unnotated Residence Certificates
that are known to be a copy of their respective voter's affidavit. In addition to such, the
contested will was executed and acknowledged before respondent on June 30, 1965 but bears
a Residence Certificate by the Testator dated January 5, 1962, which was never submitted for
filing to the Archives Division of the Records Management and Archives Office of the National
Commission for Culture and Arts (NCAA). Respondent, on the other hand, claimed that all
allegations are falsely given because he allegedly exercised his duties as Notary Public with due
care and with due regards to the provision of existing law and had complied with elementary
formalities in the performance of his duties and that the complaint was filed simply to harass
him based on the result of a criminal case against him in the Ombudsman that did not prosper.
However, he did not deny the contention of non-filing a copy to the Archives Division of NCAA.
In resolution, the court referred the case to the IBP and the decision of which was affirmed with
modification against the respondent and in favor of the complainant.

Issue: 

Whether or not Atty. Regino B. Tambago committed a violation in Notarial Law and the Ethics of
Legal Profession for notarizing a spurious last will and testament?

Ruling: 

Yes. As per Supreme Court, Atty. Regino B. Tambago is guilty of professional misconduct as he
violated the Lawyer's Oath, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, Canon 1 and Rule 1.01 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility, Article 806 of the Civil Code and provision of the Notarial Law.
Thus, Atty. Tambago is suspended from the practice of law for one year and his Notarial
commission revoked. In addition, because he has not lived up to the trustworthiness expected
of him as a notary public and as an officer of the court, he is perpetually disqualified from
reappointments as a Notary Public.