FACTS:

The case involves an administrative charge for gross misconduct filed by complainant Emelita Solarte against respondent Atty. Teofilo F. Pugeda. Respondent, who was a municipal judge in the 1960s, allegedly notarized certain documents involving the sale of land situated in Cavite. The complainant, claiming an interest in the sold lots as a descendant of the original owner, requested copies of the deeds of sale from respondent. Unable to obtain copies, she went to another child of the original owner who allowed her to look at the documents, which complainant then recorded and retyped. Complainant alleged that respondent's actions constituted gross misconduct, particularly his participation in the fraudulent partition and sale of the property. Respondent argued that he was no longer obligated to provide the documents and denied any involvement in the partition. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) recommended the dismissal of the charge, finding no prohibition for a notary public to witness a document he notarized and lacking concrete proof of respondent's involvement. The court agreed with the IBP's recommendation, noting that the complainant's claims lacked substantiation and that the issues of the partition and sale had already been brought before and upheld by the courts in previous cases. Therefore, the court dismissed the complaint as without merit.

ISSUES:

1. Whether there is a prohibition for a notary public to act as a witness in the document he notarized.

2. Whether the respondent can be held liable for the fraudulent partition of the subject property.

RULING:

1. The court held that there is no prohibition for a notary public to act as a witness in the document he notarized, except for wills.

2. The court found that the complainant failed to provide concrete substantiation for her allegations that the respondent was involved in the fraudulent partition of the subject property. The court also noted that the validity of the partition and the deeds of sale were already upheld by the courts in 1979 and have since attained finality. Consequently, the complaint against the respondent was dismissed.

PRINCIPLES:

• There is no prohibition for a notary public to act as a witness in the document he notarized, except for wills.

• Allegations of misconduct against a member of the bar and former municipal judge require concrete substantiation to gain credence.

• Judgments upholding the validity of a partition and deeds of sale that have attained finality cannot be reopened in an administrative charge.