Supreme Court decision · Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises

Cabatu v. Domingo

Adm. Case No. 797 · Promulgated May 31, 1982 · Ponente: Fernando

In brief

This case is about a disbarment complaint against a lawyer for allegedly contracting a second marriage while his first marriage was subsisting; it was dismissed because the complainant lost interest and respondent could not be located.

Disbarment, Second Marriage, Loss of Interest, Dismissal, Legal Ethics

Related cases

  • Adm. Matter No. 2240-MJ Abiog v. Pascual (Previous decision in Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises)
  • Adm. Matter No. 2180-MJ Mariano v. Gonzales (Next decision in Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises)

Full text

SECOND DIVISION

[ Adm. Case No. 797. May 31, 1982 ]

LYDIA CABATU, COMPLAINANT, VS. EDGARDO C. DOMINGO, RESPONDENT.

D E C I S I O N


FERNANDO, C.J.:

The fitness of respondent Edgardo C. Domingo to remain a member of the Philippine Bar was assailed in this complaint for disbarment filed by Lydia Cabatu. It was alleged that notwithstanding the fact that his marriage with complainant was valid and subsisting, he contracted a second marriage with one Florecita A. Pe Aguirre on September 16, 1967. Respondent was required to answer. All he said was that he was without knowledge of such allegation. The case was then referred to the Solicitor General[1] for investigation, report, and recommendation. Such report was submitted on January 18, 1982.

The case had to be set for hearing on three occasions, the first two not taking place as subpoenas for both complainant and respondent were returned unclaimed. The Report went on to state: "Despite receipt by complainant and her counsel of the order setting the case for hearing on October 13, 1981, neither one appeared. Indeed, from the time the complaint was filed in 1967 up to the present time, there has not been any move on the part of complainant to pursue her complaint. It is fairly evident that she has lost interest in prosecuting the case."[2] As for the respondent, the record disclosed that the registered letter addressed to him was received "with the notation on the envelope: 'addressee moved to USA, no forwarding address.' "[3]

The recommendation was understandably for the dismissal of the complaint for disbarment.

WHEREFORE, the petition is dismissed. No costs.

Aquino, Guerrero, De Castro, and Escolin, JJ., concur.
Barredo, J., votes with J. Abad Santos for provisional dismissal.
Concepcion, Jr., J., on leave.


[1] Solicitor General Estelito P. Mendoza was assisted by Assistant Solicitor General Eduardo Monte­negro and Solicitor Oswaldo D. Agcaoili.

[2] Report, 3.

[3] Ibid.