Maria Apiag et.al v Judge Esmeraldo Cantero AM No.

MTJ-95-1070 [February 12, 1997]

Reyes, J.B.L.
FACTS: The wedding of Maria Apiag (one of the complainants) and Esmeraldo Cantero (respondent-judge) took place on August 11, 1947. They begot two children, Teresita and Glicero (complainants). Thereafter, Esmeraldo left the conjugal home and abandoned his wife and children without any means of support. Later on, the complainants learned that Esmeraldo contracted another marriage with Nieves Ygay and they have 5 children of their own. In all the documents filed by Esmeraldo such as his sworn statement of assets and liabilities, personal data sheet, income tax return, and insurance policy with GSIS, he misrepresented himself as being married to Nieves. Herein complainants charged Esmeraldo with gross misconduct for allegedly having committed bigamy and for falsifying public documents. In his comment, Esmeraldo denied the validity of the marriage alleging that it was dramatized and that his parents called him to appear in a certain drama marriage and was forced to sign a duly prepared marriage contract. He pressed the idea that his consent was not freely given. The fact, however, is undisputed that he and Maria were engaged in a love affair which resulted in the pregnancy of the latter prior to the marriage. It is only for the preservation of the family name that their parents agreed to their marriage but not to live together as husband and wife. To bolster his defense, Esmeraldo alleged that Maria has been living with another man during her public service as a teacher and have begotten a child, named Manuel Apiag. He argued the he who seek justice must seek justice with clean hands. He didnt file any annulment or judicial declaration of the alleged marriage because he believed that said marriage was void from the beginning. Thus, nothing is to be nullified because the marriage never existed. However, in view of the complainants request in their letter to the respondent dated September 21, 1993, both parties have agreed that Teresita shall: (1) get of the retirement that Esmeraldo will receive from GSIS; (2) be included as one of the beneficiaries in case of the latters death; (3) inherit the properties of the latter; and (2) receive and collect Php 4000 monthly as support. The issues presented and decisions held by the investigating judge and court administrator are as follows:
1. That the first marriage with the complainant, Maria Apiag on August 11, 1947 is void;

No. Respondent knows that the marriage cannot be dissolved without a judicial declaration of death. Respondent's second marriage with Nieves Ygay was therefore bigamous for it was contracted during the existence of a previous marriage.

2.

The absence of his first wife complainant Maria Apiag for more than seven (7) years raise the presumption that she is already dead, that there was no need for any judicial declaration;

No. Theres still a need for judicial declaration presumptive death and of nullity of marriage.

3.

The charge of Grave Misconduct is not applicable to him because assuming that he committed the offense, he was not yet a member of the judiciary;

No. We are likewise not persuaded by the assertion of the respondent that he cannot be held liable for misconduct on the ground that he was not yet a lawyer nor a judge when the act(s) complained of were committed. The infraction he committed continued from the time he became a lawyer in 1960 to the time he was appointed as a judge in October 23, 1989.

4.

The crime of Bigamy and Falsification had already prescribed;

No. On the charge of falsification, it was shown with clarity in his Personal Data Sheet for Judges, Sworn Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth, Income Tax Return (pp. 99-102, rollo), that he had committed a misrepresentation by stating therein that his spouse is Nieves Ygay and (had) eight (8) children (with her) which is far from (the) truth that his wife is Maria Apiag with whom he had two (2) children.

5.

The charges have no basis in fact and in law.

No. Aside from the admission, the untenable line of defense by the respondent presupposes the imposition of an administrative sanction for the charges filed against him. "A judge's actuation of cohabiting with another when his marriage was still valid and subsisting his wife having been allegedly absent for four years only constitutes gross immoral conduct" (Abadilla vs. Tabiliran Jr., 249 SCRA 447). It is evident that respondent failed to meet the standard of moral fitness for membership in the legal profession.

ISSUES: 1. W/N Esmeraldo committed gross misconduct for abandonment, failing to give support, marrying for the 2nd time without having first obtained judicial declaration of nullity, and falsification of public documents. 2. W/N Esmeraldos 2nd marriage with Nieves Ygay is valid, notwithstanding that there was no judicial nullity of the formers marriage with Maria. HELD: 1. No. Misconduct, as a ground for administrative action, has a specific meaning in law. It only covers such performance of duties as an officer and not such only affects his character as a private individual. The acts imputed to Esmeraldo clearly pertain to his personal life and have no direct relation to his judicial function. It is necessary to separate the character of the man from the character of the officer. 2. Yes, the second marriage is valid. Article 40 or the NCC provides that marriage though void still needs a judicial declaration of nullity before any party can remarry. This was enunciated in Wiegel v. Sempio-Diy. However, prior decision of the Supreme Court in Odayat v. Amante states that no judicial decree is necessary to establish the invalidity of void marriages. The latter case is applicable to the foregoing because the second

marriage of Esmeraldo to Nieves took place before the promulgation of the Wiegel case and before the effectivity of the Family Code. In line with this, the charge of falsification of public documents will not prosper because the bigamy complaint was not found. Esmeraldo believed in good faith that the first marriage was void and it in this belief that shows his lack of malice in filling up the public documents.