CRESCENCIANO M. PITOGO vs. ATTY. JOSELITO TROY SUELLO A.C. No.

10695
March 18, 2015

Legal and Judicial Ethics; Notarization; Notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act. It is invested with
such substantial public interest that only those who are qualified or authorized may act as notaries public.
Notarization converts a private document into a public document, making that document admissible in evidence
without further proof of its authenticity. For this reason, notaries must observe with utmost care the basic
requirements in the performance of their duties. Otherwise, the confidence of the public in the integrity of this form
of conveyance would be undermined.

FACTS:
• Atty. Joselito Troy Suello (Suello) notarized the documents for the registration of the
motorcycle of Crescenciano M. Pitogo (Pitogo) which the latter purchased from Emcor,
Inc. Pitogo obtained a copy of the documents from the Land Transportation Office and
proceeded to Suello’s office to have the documents certified since these were important
in his pending civil case against Emcor, Inc. However, Suello ignored Pitogo’s request and
instead ordered his secretary to give Pitogo a copy of his notarial register. Upon noticing
that there were discrepancies between the notarized documents and the entries in the
notarial register, Pitogo filed an Affidavit-Complaint against Suello. In the Affidavit-
Complaint, Suello claimed that he certified the documents as true copies. Later, in his
Position Paper, he passed the blame to his secretary, claiming that it was his secretary
who certified Pitogo’s documents.

ISSUE: WHETHER OR NOT SUELLO IS LIABLE FOR NEGLIGENCE IN KEEPING AND MAINTAINING HIS
NOTARIAL REGISTER

RULING:
• AFFIRMATIVE. Notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act. It is invested with
such substantial public interest that only those who are qualified or authorized may act
as notaries public. Notarization converts a private document into a public document,
making that document admissible in evidence without further proof of its authenticity.
For this reason, notaries must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the
performance of their duties. Otherwise, the confidence of the public in the integrity of
this form of conveyance would be undermined. Failure to properly record entries in the
notarial register is a ground for revocation of notarial commission.
• When Atty. Suelo negligently failed to enter the details of the documents on his notarial
register, he cast doubt on the authenticity of the said documents and on the credibility of
the notarial register and the notarial process. He violated the law which requires lawyers
to promote respect for law and legal processes. Suello also appeared to have committed
a falsehood in the pleadings he submitted. Initially, Suello claimed that he certified the
documents as true copies. Later, he passed the blame to his secretary. This violates the
Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits lawyers from engaging in dishonest
and unlawful conduct.
• The secretary cannot be held responsible for the erroneous entries in the notarial register.
The notarial commission is a license held personally by the notary public. It cannot be
further delegated. It is the notary public alone who is personally responsible for the
correctness of the entries in his or her notarial register. Suello’s apparent regret may
alleviate the injury done privately, but it does not change the nature of the violation.