Albano Vs Gapusan

A.M. No.
1022-MJ May 7, 1976
REDENTOR ALBANO, Complainant, vs. MUNICIPAL JUDGE PATROCINIO C.

GAPUSAN of Dumalneg, Ilocos Norte, Respondent.
Facts:
Redentor Albano in a verified complaint dated August 18, 1975 charged Municipal Judge
Patrocinio C. Gapusan of Dumalneg and Adams, Ilocos Norte (1) with incompetence and
Ignorance of the law for having prepared and notarized a document providing for tile
personal separation of husband and wife and the extrajudicial liquidation of their conjugal
partnership and (2) with having allegedly influenced Judge Zacarias A. Crispin of the
Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte in deciding two criminal cases.
In 1941 or five years before his appointment to the bench, respondent Gapusan notarized
a document for the personal separation of the spouses Valentina Andres and Guillermo
Maligta of Barrio 6, Vintar, Ilocos Norte and for the extrajudicial liquidation of their
conjugal partnership. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law lib rary
It was stipulated in that document that if either spouse should commit adultery or
concubinage, as the case may be, then the other should refrain from filing an action
against the other. chanroblesv irtualawlibrary chanrobleibrary
Judge Gapusan denied that he drafted the agreement. He explained that the spouses had
been separated for a long time when they signed the separation agreement and that the
wife had begotten children with her paramour. He said that there was a stipulation in the
agreement that the spouses would live together in case of reconciliation. His belief was
that the separation agreement forestalled the occurrence of violent incidents between the
spouses. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
Albano in filing the malpractice charge is in effect asking this Court to take belated
disciplinary action against Judge Gapusan as a member of the bar or as a notary. (He was
admitted to the bar in 1937). chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
- Albano complains that Judge Gapusan took advantage of his intimacy with Judge
Crispin. He implies that by reason of that intimacy Judge Crispin acquitted of frustrated
murder the defendants in Criminal Case No. 102-III, People vs. Freddie Gapusan
Gamboa, et al. and convicted Albano (complainant herein) of double frustrated murder
with triple attempted murder in Criminal Case No. 70-III. chanroblesv irtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
Albano said that Freddie Gapusan, an accused in the first criminal case above-mentioned
and a complaining witness in the other case against Albano, is a relative of Judge
Gapusan. He revealed that after the acquittal decision was rendered by Judge Crispin in
Criminal Case No. 102 III, the relatives of the accused in that case were saying that their
relationship to Judge Gapusan, a friend of Judge Crispin, proved to be "worthwhile and
useful". chanroblesv irtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
Judge Gapusan admitted in his answer that he is close to Judge Crispin because they used
to be members of the Municipal Judges League (when it was headed by Judge Crispin)
and because the latter used to be an Executive Judge (with supervision over municipal
judges). Respondent said that his association with Judge Crispin "was purely official".
virtual law library
chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles
Judge Gapusan also admitted that Freddie Gapusan is his distant relative. He denied that
he influenced Judge Crispin in rendering his decisions in the two criminal cases. chanroblesvirtualaw library chanrobles virtual law library
It is manifest that Alliano's imputation that Judge Gapusan influenced Judge Crispin is
anchored on mere suspicion. If he has any evidence that Judge Crispin committed any
irregularity due to the alleged influence exerted by Judge Gapusan, then Albano should
have complained against Judge Crispin's actuations. He should riot vent his ire on Judge
Gapusan alone. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library
Issue:
W/N the covenants contained in the said separation agreement are contrary to law, morals
and good customs
Ruling:
WHEREFORE, the respondent, as a member of the bar, is for having notarized the
above-mentioned void agreement. The second charge is dismissed. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual

Albano Vs Gapusan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Albano Vs Gapusan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Albano Vs Gapusan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A.M. No.

1022-MJ May 7, 1976

REDENTOR ALBANO, Complainant, vs. MUNICIPAL JUDGE PATROCINIO C.

You might also like