APIAG V CANTERO

Administrative Matter in the Supreme Court. Gross Misconduct and Falsification of

Public Documents
February 12, 1997
Complainants: Maria Apiag (Wife of respondent in first marriage), Teresita Cantero
Securom and Glicero Cantero (Children of Maria and respondent)
Respondent-judge: Judge Esmeraldo G. Cantero

FACTS:

Maria Apiag and Esmeraldo Cantero were married on August 11, 1947. This
marriage bore two children, Teresita and Glicero (complainants)
Esmeraldo Cantero abandoned his wife and children in Hinundayan, Southern
Leyte.
Respondent-judge resurfaced in Hinundayan, the complainants begged for
support but he ignored their please.
On September 21, 1993 the complainants wrote a letter to the respondentjudge as formal demand for maintenance and support and also to be named
the respondent-judges compulsory heirs and legal beneficiaries.
The complainants learned that respondent-judge had contracted another
marriage with Nieves C. Ygay and they had 5 children.
In a letter complaint dated Nov. 10, 1993, complainants charged Esmeraldo
Cantero with gross misconduct for bigamy and falsification of public
documents (for misrepresenting himself as married to Nieves Ygay).
In his comment, respondent Judge claimed:
o His marriage with Apiag was invalid because it was done in jest and
without his consent freely given, alleging that we was only called tome
by his parents to attend his sisters wedding but he later found out that
he was made to appear in a drama marriage and was forced to
acknowledge their signatures in the marriage contract.
o They had an affair which resulted to the pregnancy. And he allegedly
got married with the complainant to save name and shame. After
said marriage, they separated without living together as husband and
wife.
o The respondent Judge also mentioned that Apiag was living another
man.
o He didnt file annulment or judicial declaration because he believed
that the marriage was void from the beginning.
March 1994, the two parties had an agreement that Teresita will get part of
retirement benefits from GSIS, be a beneficiary and inherit properties in case
of respondents death, and receive monthly support of P4,000 on the
condition that they withdraw and dismiss the case filed in the Supreme Court.
The complainants followed through with the charges.

ISSUES
1. WN respondent Judge committed gross misconduct in abandoning his
family, contracting into another marriage without annulment or judicial
declaration of nullity, falsification of documents
2. WN his marriage with Nieves Ygay in spite of the fact that there was no
annulment judicial declaration of nullity of his first marriage.
Resolution
1. NO. Gross misconduct is not applicable because misconduct pertains to
actions which affect the performance of his duties as an officer and not as
a private individual.
2. YES. The marriage in question was celebrated before the promulgation of
Wiegel v Sempio-Diy and the effectivity of Article 40 of the NCC both of
which provides that there be judicial declaration of nullity before
remarriage. Odayat v Amante which provides that no judicial decree is
needed to establish void marriages is more appropriate for this case. The
charge of Falsification of documents will not prosper as well since bigamy
was disproved.
3.
PETITION DISMISSED.