7/22/2019 Macarrubo v Macarrubo
1/2
MACARRUBO v MACARRUBO
Facts: Florence Macarrubo by herself and on behalf of her 2
children files a
complaint for disbarment against Edmundo Macarrubo alleging that
Edmundo
deceived her into marrying him despite his prior subsisting
marriage with a certain
Helen Esparza. Florence further averred that Edmundo entered
into a 3rd marriage
with Josephine Constantino; and that he abandoned Florence
without providingthem w/ regular support. Edmundo denied the
allegations, insisting instead that
complainant Florence was fully aware of his prior subsisting
marriage, but that
Florence dragged Edmundo against his will to a 'sham wedding'.
Edmundo
submitted the decision of RTC declaring his marriage to
complainant void ab initio.
Edmundo claimed that he left complainant and their 2 children w/
her consent.
Issue:W/n Edmundo should be disbarred...
Held: Yes. Facts show that while Edmundo has a subsisting
marriage w/ Helen
Esparza w/ whom he had 2 children, he entered into a 2nd
marriage with
complainant. While the marriage between complainant Florence and
Edmundo hasbeen annulled by final judgment, this does not cleanse
his conduct of impropriety.
Even assuming arguendo that Edmundo was coerced by complainant
to marry her,
the duress has ceased after wedding day. Edmundo having freely
cohabited with her
and even begot a 2nd child. The decision of RTC annulling their
marriage is not res
judicata on the final resolution of this case. A disbarment case
is sui generis for it is
neither purely civil nor criminal but is rather an investigation
by the court on the
conduct of its officers
A.c.no.6148, feb. 27, 2004Florence macarrubo vs. Atty. Edmundo
macarrubo
Facts: the complainant filed a disbarment case against the
respondent alleging that
respondent deceived her into marrying him despite his prior
subsisting marriage
with a certain helen esperanza.this was also followed by a third
time marriage
transaction with josephine constantino.the respondent anchored
his defense on the
annullment of the previous marriage he entered as well as the
existing annulment
process of the third one.hefurther proved his constant support
of their children in
terms of education and their leisure.
Issue: is the act of the respondent in contracting several
marriages constitute
immorality despite the fact that those marriages was later
declared annulled?
Ruling:yes,the courts find the respondent guilty for gross
misconduct
reflectingsunfavorably on the moral norms of the profession.the
annulment of his
marriage withfinal judgment did not cleanse his conduct of every
tinge of
impropriety.insum,respondent has breached the preceipts of the
code of
professional responsibility particularly,rule 1.01,canon 7.01
rule 7.03 of the same
code.the penalty recommended bythe ibp which is 3 months
suspension did not
![K À À ] Á } ( ] v ] ] ] À ( } v Z v ] v P } } ] v ] } v v ...€¦ · / v } µ ] } v & } ] v P Ç v P ] v v Z v ] v P } o o } ] } v v } } ] v ] } v } ] } ] À ] Ç r o } v À](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/5f71be7f1345627ffc7c2e81/k-v-v-z-v-v-p-v-v-v-v-v.jpg)
![Z ] o Á Ç h v l ] v P [ , v } } l ( } / v v ] } v o } v ] v P v Ç D v P u v · 2019-12-19 · Z ] o Á Ç h v l ] v P [ , v } } l ( } / v v ] } v o } v ] v P v Ç D v P u v À](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/5f2eab6074991d12ea1c794e/z-o-h-v-l-v-p-v-l-v-v-v-o-v-v-p-v-d-v-p-u-v-2019-12-19.jpg)
![K À À o } u v / v ] µ d µ [ v v µ o Z } v & ] v v ] o ^ u v & } Z Ç v ï í D Z ... · 2020-06-11 · > } v } v > } v } v & o } } > } v } v > } v } v ï. ] } ( ] } v](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/5f4c35a06e294b0279422fd6/k-o-u-v-v-d-v-v-o-z-v-v-v-o-u-v-z-.jpg)
