EFREN MORALES, SR., complainant, vs. JUDGE CESAR M. DUMLAO, Presiding Judge and DANILO B. RAMONES, Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court, San Mateo, Isabela, respondents.
FACTS:
Marciano Morales, father of
complainant and plaintiff in Civil Case No. 4038, executed a General Power of
Attorney (GPA) authorizing complainant Efren Morales, Sr. to
perform acts of general administration over the property of the family, and
empowering him to represent his father in a pending civil case and to mortgage
a portion of the land to finance the litigation. On October 12, 1998, Marciano Morales
executed a revocation of the General Power of Attorney in favor of complainant Efren Morales,
Sr. The revocation of the power of attorney was notarized by respondent
Judge. On March 12, 1999, respondent Judge issued an Order deputizing
respondent Clerk of Court to supervise the harvest of the palay and
to deposit the harvest in a bonded warehouse.
Complainant claims that the act of
the respondent Judge in notarizing the revocation of the General Power of
Attorney violated Supreme Court Circular No. 1-90, which delineates the power
of Municipal Trial Court Judges and Municipal Circuit Trial Court Judges to act
as Notaries Public Ex Officio.
ISSUE: Whether or
not the respondent Judge violated SC Circular No. 1-90.
“MTC and MCTC judges may act as
notaries public ex officio in the notarization of documents connected only with
the exercise of their official functions and duties. They may not,
as notaries public ex officio, undertake the preparation and acknowledgment of
private documents, contracts and other acts of conveyances which bear no direct
which bear no direct relation to the performance of their functions as
judges. The 1989 Code of Judicial Conduct not only enjoins judges to
regulate their extra-judicial activities in order to minimize the risk of
conflict with their judicial duties, but also prohibits them from engaging in
the private practice of law. “
Comments
Post a Comment