A.C. No. 3405 June 29, 1998
JULIETA B. NARAG, complainant,
vs.
ATTY. DOMINADOR M. NARAG, respondent.
DOCTRINE
Good moral character is not only a condition precedent to the practice of law, but a continuing qualification for all members of the bar. Hence, when a lawyer is found guilty of gross immoral conduct, he may be suspended or disbarred.
FACTS
Mrs. Julieta Narag filed an administrative complaint for disbarment against her spouse Atty. Dominador Narag, alleging that the latter courted one of his students named Gina Espita and they then maintained an illicit relationship known in various circles in the community.
Her husband abandoned his family to live with Ms. Espita, in utterly scandalous circumstances. The case was referred to the IBP for investigation. Later on, the complainant sought for the dismissal of the administrative complaint and retracted all her previous allegations.
The case took an unexpected turn when, the Court received another letter from the complainant, with her seven children as co-signatories, again appealing for the disbarment of her husband. She explained that she had earlier dropped the case against him because of his husband’s continuous threats against her.
The investigating officer submitted his report, recommending the indefinite suspension of Atty. Narag from the practice of law. However, the IBP imposed the penalty of disbarment.
ISSUE
Whether or not Atty. Narag should be disbarred from practice of law.
RULING
YES. The Court found that the conduct of respondent warrants the imposition of the penalty of disbarment.
Good moral character is not only a condition precedent to the practice of law, but a continuing qualification for all members of the bar. Hence, when a lawyer is found guilty of gross immoral conduct, he may be suspended or disbarred.
Respondent Narag is accused of gross immorality for abandoning his family in order to live with Gina Espita. On the strength of the testimony of her witnesses, the complainant was able to establish that respondent abandoned his family and lived with another woman. Further, the complainant presented as evidence the love letters that respondent had sent to Gina. In these letters, respondent clearly manifested his love for Gina and her two children, whom he acknowledged as his own.
Read full text at
https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1998/jun1998/ac_3405_1998.html
