Supreme Court decision · Administrative Law
Odayat v. Amante
A.M. No. P-58 · Promulgated June 2, 1977 · Ponente: Antonio
In brief
This case is about an administrative complaint against a Clerk of Court for oppression, immorality, and falsification. The Supreme Court exonerated him after finding the marriage void and the falsification charge unproven.
Clerk of Court, Immorality, Falsification, Void Marriage, Exoneration
Related cases
- G.R. No. L-40185 Ting Ping Lay v. Colayco (Previous decision in Administrative Law)
- G.R. No. L-27127 Wise & Company, Inc. v. Customs Arrastre Service (Next decision in Administrative Law)
Full text
EN BANC
[ A.M. No. P-58. June 02, 1977 ]
PEDRO ODAYAT, COMPLAINANT, VS. DEMETRIO
AMANTE, RESPONDENT.
D E C I S I O N
ANTONIO, J.:
In a verified amended letter-complaint dated
Briefly stated, complainants basic allegations are: (1) that respondent grabbed a portion of complainant's land, and, when the latter resented, the former arrogantly challenged the complainant to bring the matter to court; (2) that respondent is cohabiting with one Beatriz Jornada, with whom he begot many children, even while his spouse Filomena Abella is still alive; and (3) that respondent, although married, falsely represented his status as single in the information sheet he submitted in connection with his appointment to his present position as Clerk of Court.
After respondent Demetrio Amante had submitted his letter-comment dated
1. Oppression. - In the course of formal investigation on
Hence, the scope of the investigation by Judge Zosa is limited to the other two charges.
2. Immorality. - To prove this charge of immorality
against respondent, complainant Pedro Odayat
testified and presented Exhibits "A" to "E", to the effect
that respondent and Filomena Abella
were married in Tacloban City on October 16, 1948
before Judge Eugenio Brillo
(then Justice of the Peace of Tacloban, Leyte;[7]
that they had one son, who was born on August 23, 1949 and baptized on October
1, 1949 by the name of Romeo Amante, in the Sto. Niño Church, Tacloban City, by Rev. Fr. Magdaleno
Agnes;[8]
that he came to know Filomena Abella,
who is a native of Sta. Rita, Samar, only after her
marriage to the respondent when they took up their residence for five years in Basey, Samar; that he did not
know if Filomena Abella was
still single when she married the respondent; that long before he filed his complaint
against respondent on March 10, 1973, he came to know that the respondent and
one Beatriz Jornado were living as husband and wife
in Basey, Samar; that they
had several children, two of whom are Maria Felisa J.
Amante, who was born on April 12, 1967, as per
certified true copy of the Certificate of Birth of said child,[9]
duly signed and issued on May 7, 1973 by Perfecto Cabuquit,
the Local Civil Registrar,[10]
and Alma Amante y Jornada, who
was born on April 8, 1965 and baptized on July 5, 1965, as per Certificate of Baptism, duly signed and issued
on March 6, 1973 by the Parish
Priest, Rev. Fr. Jose M. Lentejas;[11]
and that one of the reasons why he filed his complaint against respondent was because of their land
dispute.
On the other hand, respondent Demetrio Amante testified, in his behalf, and presented Atty. Demosthenes Duquilla,
as well as Exhibits "1" and "2". Respondent admits his marriage with Filomena Abella on
To rebut the charge of immorality, respondent presented in
evidence the certification dated
The Investigator finds for the respondent and recommends his exoneration from this charge. Indeed, there is no question that Filomena Abella's marriage with the respondent was void ab initio under Article 80[4] of the New Civil Code, and no judicial decree is necessary to establish the invalidity of void marriages.[16]
3. Falsification of a public document. - The Investigator found that the complainant failed to prove this charge. Contrary to the allegation of the complainant, the document in question,[17] shows that the respondent actually- placed in "Item 6. Civil Status" therein the word "Married".[18]
In view of the foregoing, We find that the recommendation of the Investigator is in accordance with law and the evidence on record.
WHEREFORE, respondent Demetrio Amante is hereby exonerated from the charges filed against him by complainant. Let a copy of this decision be attached to his personal record.
Castro, C.J., Fernando, Teehankee, Barredo, Makasiar, Muñoz Palma, Aquino, and Martin, JJ., concur.Concepcion, Jr. J., on leave.
[1] This amended letter-complaint was addressed to the Secretary of Justice, Manila, and the latter forwarded the same to this Court, pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 185.
[2] Exhibit "A", p. 1, Folder of Exhibits.
[3] SC Rollo, pp. 7-8.
[4] Ibid., p. 17.
[5] Ibid., pp. 38-46.
[6] T.s.n.-Rojas, Session of August 26, 1974, pp. 3-4.
[7] Exhibit "B", certified true copy of the Marriage Contract, duly signed and issued on December 13, 1972 by Dr. Hermilo Quintero, City Health Officer and Local Civil Registrar (Exhibit "B-1").
[8] Exhibit "C", certified true copy of the Baptismal Certificate of Romeo Amante, duly signed and issued on August 6, 1974 by Rev. Fr. Honorio Ayuyao Pastor (Exhibit "C-2") and by Gil Ramon J. Abug, Parish Clerk (Exhibit "C-3").
[9] Exhibit "D".
[10] Exhibit “D-1”.
[11] Exhibit "E".
[12] Exhibit "B", p. 3, Folder of Exhibits; Respondent's Comment, p. 7, SC Rollo; t.s.n.-Cabelis, Session of October 28, 1974, p. 28.
[13] T.s.n..-Cabelis, Session of October 28, 1974, pp. 21-24.
[14] Ibid., p. 30.
[15] Exhibit "2", p. 10, Folder of Exhibits.
[16] People v. Aragon, 100 Phil. 1033; People v. Mendoza, 95 Phil. 845.
[17] Exhibit "1-b".
[18] Exhibit “1-a”.