Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 37 views

    (Castelo v. Atty. Ching

    Uploaded by

    Josh Napiza
    Orlando Castelo and others received a summons for an ejectment case regarding a property that was formerly owned by Castelo heirs' parents but was transferred to new owners via a deed of absolute sale notarized by Atty. Ronald Ching. Irregularities were found in the execution and authorization of the deed. The Castelo heirs filed an administrative case against Atty. Ching for gross negligence. The Supreme Court affirmed the finding of gross negligence, as Atty. Ching failed to ensure the necessary notarization requirements were met and failed to properly secure his notarial instruments, allowing an opportunity for forgery.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    (Castelo v. Atty. Ching

    Uploaded by

    Josh Napiza
    37 views1 page
    Orlando Castelo and others received a summons for an ejectment case regarding a property that was formerly owned by Castelo heirs' parents but was transferred to new owners via a deed of absolute sale notarized by Atty. Ronald Ching. Irregularities were found in the execution and authorization of the deed. The Castelo heirs filed an administrative case against Atty. Ching for gross negligence. The Supreme Court affirmed the finding of gross negligence, as Atty. Ching failed to ensure the necessary notarization requirements were met and failed to properly secure his notarial instruments, allowing an opportunity for forgery.

    Original Description:

    case

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Orlando Castelo and others received a summons for an ejectment case regarding a property that was formerly owned by Castelo heirs' parents but was transferred to new owners via a deed of absolute sale notarized by Atty. Ronald Ching. Irregularities were found in the execution and authorization of the deed. The Castelo heirs filed an administrative case against Atty. Ching for gross negligence. The Supreme Court affirmed the finding of gross negligence, as Atty. Ching failed to ensure the necessary notarization requirements were met and failed to properly secure his notarial instruments, allowing an opportunity for forgery.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    37 views1 page

    (Castelo v. Atty. Ching

    Uploaded by

    Josh Napiza
    Orlando Castelo and others received a summons for an ejectment case regarding a property that was formerly owned by Castelo heirs' parents but was transferred to new owners via a deed of absolute sale notarized by Atty. Ronald Ching. Irregularities were found in the execution and authorization of the deed. The Castelo heirs filed an administrative case against Atty. Ching for gross negligence. The Supreme Court affirmed the finding of gross negligence, as Atty. Ching failed to ensure the necessary notarization requirements were met and failed to properly secure his notarial instruments, allowing an opportunity for forgery.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Orlando S. Castelo, et al. Vs. Atty. Ronald Segundino C.

    Ching
    A.C. No. 11165; February 6, 2017
    Digested by: Napiza, Jose Miguel M. (2017400033)

    Doctrine: A notarized document is entitled to full faith and credit upon its face. Thus,
    a notary public should observe utmost care in performing his duties to preserve public
    confidence in the integrity of notarized documents
    Ponente: Caguioa, J.
    Petitioner: Orlando Castelo
    Respondent: Atty. Ronald Ching
    FACTS:
    Orlando Castello, et al received summons from Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 22
    for an ejectment case filed against them by Leonida Delen and Spouses Nestor and
    Jesiebel Delen alleged owner of the residence of the Castellos. Upon verifying, the
    Castellos discovered that the property in contention was actually named previously
    from Castello heirs parents but was cancelled in favor of the Delens by virtue of a
    Deed of Absolute Sale. Irregularities were present in the execution and authorization
    of the Deed of Absolute Sale. With their discovery, the Castello heirs filed with IBP
    an administrative case against Atty. Ching on the lawyer’s gross negligence in
    notarizing the Deed. After due proceedings, Commissioner Eduardo Robles rendered
    a report and recommendation finding Atty. CHing guilty of gross negligence in
    notarizing the Deed. The IBP on the other hand adopted and approved the
    recommendation with modification.
    ISSUE:
    Whether or not Atty. Ching was guilty of gross negligence in notarizing the Deed.
    RULING:
    The Supreme Court affirmed Commissioner Robles’ observation. Giving Atty. Ching
    the benefit of the doubt, the court cannot skip to notice the fact that Atty. Ching still
    failed in insuring the necessary requirements as regards those which were supposed to
    be entered in the notarial books. This also meant that Atty. Ching failed to secure
    properly his instruments, so that persons would not have opportunity to forge
    notarizing documents with his signature affixed therein. With there facts taken into
    considerations, the SC found Atty. Ching guilty of gross negligence in notarizing
    Deed.

    You might also like