7/24/2019 7. Cordova vs Cordova

1/3

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManilaEN BANCA.C. No. 3249November 29, 1989SALVACION DELIZO CORDOVA,complainant,vsATTY. LAURENCE D. CORDOVA,respondent.R E S O L U T I O N

PER CURIAM:!n an uns"orn letter#complaint $ate$ 1% April 1988 a$$resse$ to then Mr Chief &usticeClau$io 'eehan(ee, complainant )alvacion *eli+o chare$ her husban$, Att- .aurence *Cor$ova, "ith immoralit- an$ acts unbecomin a member of the Bar 'he letter#complaint"as for"ar$e$ b- the Court to the !nterate$ Bar of the Philippines, Commission on Bar*iscipline /0Commission, for investiation, report an$ recommen$ation

'he Commission, before actin on the complaint, re3uire$ complainant to submit averi4e$ complaint "ithin ten /15 $a-s from notice Complainant complie$ an$ submitte$to the Commission on 26 )eptember 1988 a revise$ an$ veri4e$ version of her lon an$$etaile$ complaint aainst her husban$ charin him "ith immoralit- an$ actsunbecomin a member of the Bar!n an 7r$er of the Commission $ate$ 1 *ecember 1988, respon$ent "as $eclare$ in$efault for failure to 4le an ans"er to the complaint "ithin 4fteen /1 $a-s from notice

'he same 7r$er re3uire$ complainant to submit before the Commission her evi$ence eparte, on 1: *ecember 1988 ;pon the teleraphic re3uest of complainant for theresettin of the 1: *ecember 1988 hearin, the Commission sche$ule$ another hearinon 2 &anuar- 1989 'he hearin sche$ule$ for 2 &anuar- 1989 "as resche$ule$ t"o /2more times < 4rst, for 2 =ebruar- 1989 an$ secon$, for 15 an$ 11 April 1989 'hehearins never too( place as complainant faile$ to appear Respon$ent Cor$ova nevermove$ to set asi$e the or$er of $efault, even thouh notices of the hearins sche$ule$"ere sent to him!n a teleraphic messae $ate$ : April 1989, complainant informe$ the Commission thatshe an$ her husban$ ha$ alrea$- 0reconcile$ !n an or$er $ate$ 16 April 1989, theCommission re3uire$ the parties /respon$ent an$ complainant to appear before it forcon4rmation an$ eplanation of the teleraphic messae an$ re3uire$ them to 4le aformal motion to $ismiss the complaint "ithin 4fteen /1 $a-s from notice Neither part-respon$e$ an$ nothin "as hear$ from either part- since thenComplainant havin faile$ to submit her evi$ence e parte before the Commission, the !BPBoar$ of >overnors submitte$ to this Court its report repriman$in respon$ent for his acts,a$monishin him that an- further acts of immoralit- in the future "ill be $ealt "ith moreseverel-, an$ or$erin him to support his leitimate famil- as a responsible parent shoul$

'he 4n$ins of the !BP Boar$ of >overnors ma- be summe$ up as follo"s?Complainant an$ respon$ent Cor$ova "ere marrie$ on : &une 196: an$ out of thismarriae, t"o /2 chil$ren "ere born !n 198, the couple live$ some"here in @uirinoProvince !n that -ear, respon$ent Cor$ova left his famil- as "ell as his ob as Branch Cler(of Court of the Reional 'rial Court, Cabarrouis, @uirino Province, an$ "ent to Manao-,Bisli, )uriao $el )ur "ith one =el- > ola$o =el- > ola$o "as herself marrie$ an$left her o"n husban$ an$ chil$ren to sta- "ith respon$ent Respon$ent Cor$ova an$ =el-> ola$o live$ toether in Bisli as husban$ an$ "ife, "ith respon$ent Cor$ovaintro$ucin =el- to the public as his "ife, an$ =el- ola$o usin the name =el- Cor$ova

Respon$ent Cor$ova ave =el- ola$o fun$s "ith "hich to establish a sari#sari store inthe public mar(et at Bisli, "hile at the same time failin to support his leitimate famil-7n : April 198:, respon$ent Cor$ova an$ his complainant "ife ha$ an apparentreconciliation Respon$ent promise$ that he "oul$ separate from =el- ola$o an$brouht his leitimate famil- to Bisli, )uriao $el )ur Respon$ent "oul$, ho"ever,fre3uentl- come home from beerhouses or cabarets, $run(, an$ continue$ to nelect thesupport of his leitimate famil- !n =ebruar- 1986, complainant foun$, upon returnin froma trip to Manila necessitate$ b- hospitali+ation of her $auhter .oraine, that respon$entCor$ova "as no loner livin "ith her /complainants chil$ren in their conual homeD thatrespon$ent Cor$ova "as livin "ith another mistress, one .uisita Maallanes, an$ ha$ta(en his -ouner $auhter Melanie alon "ith him Respon$ent an$ his ne" mistress hi$

7/24/2019 7. Cordova vs Cordova

2/3

Melanie from the complainant, compellin complainant to o to court an$ to ta(e bac( her$auhter b- habeas corpus 'he Reional 'rial Court, Bisli, ave her custo$- of theirchil$renNot"ithstan$in respon$ents promises to reform, he continue$ to live "ith .uisitaMaallanes as her husban$ an$ continue$ to fail to ive support to his leitimate famil-=inall-, the Commission receive$ a teleram messae apparentl- from complainant,statin that complainant an$ respon$ent ha$ been reconcile$ "ith each otherAfter a revie" of the recor$, "e aree "ith the 4n$ins of fact of the !BP Boar$ e alsoaree that the most recent reconciliation bet"een complainant an$ respon$ent, assuminthe same to be real, $oes not ecuse an$ "ipe a"a- the miscon$uct an$ immoral behaviorof the respon$ent carrie$ out in public, an$ necessaril- a$versel- reFectin upon him as amember of the Bar an$ upon the Philippine Bar itself An applicant for a$mission tomembership in the bar is re3uire$ to sho" that he is possesse$ of oo$ moral character

'hat re3uirement is not ehauste$ an$ $ispense$ "ith upon a$mission to membership ofthe bar 7n the contrar-, that re3uirement persists as a continuin con$ition formembership in the Bar in oo$ stan$in!n Mortel v Aspiras,1this Court, follo"in the rule in the ;nite$ )tates, hel$ that 0thecontinue$ possession of a oo$ moral character is a re3uisite con$ition for the rihtfulcontinuance in the practice of the la" an$ its loss re3uires suspension or $isbarment,even thouh the statutes $o not specif- that as a roun$ for $isbarment2!t is importantto note that the lac( of moral character that "e here refer to as essential is not limite$ tooo$ moral character relatin to the $ischare of the $uties an$ responsibilities of anattorne- at la" 'he moral $elin3uenc- that aGects the 4tness of a member of the bar tocontinue as such inclu$es con$uct that outraes the enerall- accepte$ moral stan$ar$sof the communit-, con$uct for instance, "hich ma(es 0a moc(er- of the inviolable socialinstitution or marriaeH!n Mortel, the respon$ent bein alrea$- marrie$, "ooe$ an$ "onthe heart of a sinle, 21#-ear ol$ teacher "ho subse3uentl- cohabite$ "ith him an$ borehim a son Because respon$ents con$uct in Mortel "as particularl- morall- repulsive,involvin the marr-in of his mistress to his o"n son an$ thereafter cohabitin "ith the"ife of his o"n son after the marriae he ha$ himself arrane$, respon$ent "as $isbarre$!n Ro-on v 7blena,%the respon$ent "as $eclare$ un4t to continue as a member of thebar b- reason of his immoral con$uct an$ accor$inl- $isbarre$ e "as foun$ to have

enae$ in seual relations "ith the complainant "ho conse3uentl- bore him a sonD an$ tohave maintaine$ for a number of -ears an a$ulterous relationship "ith another "oman!n the instant case, respon$ent Cor$ova maintaine$ for about t"o /2 -ears an a$ulterousrelationship "ith a marrie$ "oman not his "ife, in full vie" of the eneral public, to thehumiliation an$ $etriment of his leitimate famil- "hich he, rubbin salt on the "oun$,faile$ or refuse$ to support After a brief perio$ of 0reform respon$ent too( up aain "ithanother "oman not his "ife, cohabitin "ith her, an$ brinin alon his -oun $auhter tolive "ith them Clearl-, respon$ent Faunte$ his $isrear$ of the fun$amental institution ofmarriae an$ its elementar- obliations before his o"n $auhter an$ the communit- atlareERE=7RE, the Court Resolve$ to );)PEN* respon$ent from the practice of la"in$e4nitel- an$ until further or$ers from this Court 'he Court "ill consi$er liftin his

suspension "hen respon$ent Cor$ova submits proof satisfactor- to the Commission an$this Court that he has an$ continues to provi$e for the support of his leitimate famil- an$that he has iven up the immoral course of con$uct that he has clun toFernan, (C.J.), Narvasa, !tierre", Jr., Cr!", Paras, Feliciano, anca#co, Padilla, $idin, %armiento,Cortes, ri&o'A!ino, Medialdea and Realado, JJ., conc!r.Melencio'*errera, J., is on leave.Footnotes

1 155 Phil 8: /19: 2 155 Phil at 92 H 155 Phil at 9H % 116 Phil 8: /19:H

7/24/2019 7. Cordova vs Cordova

3/3

Case diest

+- %CRA /0 1 2eal Et3ics 1 Moral 4elin!enc#

In 1985, Atty. Laurence Cordova, while being married to Salvacion Delio and with two children, le!thi" wi!e and children to cohabit with another married woman. In 198#, Salvacion and Cordova had

a reconciliation where Cordova $romi"ed to leave hi" mi"tre"". %ut a$$arently, Cordova "til

continued to cheat on her wi!e a" a$$arently, Cordova again lived with another woman and wor"e,

he too& one o! hi" children with him and hid the child away !rom Salvacion.

In 1988, Salvacion !iled a letter'com$laint !or di"barment again"t Cordova. (ventually, multi$le

hearing date" were "ent but no hearing too& $lace becau"e neither $arty a$$eared. In 1989,

Salvacion "ent a telegra$hic me""age to the Commi""ion on %ar Di"ci$line intimating that "he and

her hu"band ha" reconciled. )he Commi""ion, "ince Salvacion !ailed to "ubmit her evidence e*$arte, merely recommended the re$rimand and admoni"hment o! Cordova.

ISSUE: +hether or not Cordova "hould be merely re$rimanded.

HELD: o. -e "hould be "u"$ended inde!initely until he $re"ent" evidence that he ha" been

morally re!ormed and that there wa" true reconciliation between him and hi" wi!e. %e!ore a $er"on

can be admitted to the bar, one reuirement i" that he $o""e""e" good moral character. )hat

reuirement i" not e*hau"ted and di"$en"ed with u$on admi""ion to member"hi$ o! the bar. /n

the contrary, that reuirement $er"i"t" a" a continuing condition !or member"hi$ in the %ar in good

"tanding. )he moral delinuency that a!!ect" the !itne"" o! a member o! the bar to continue a" "uch

include" conduct that outrage" the generally acce$ted moral "tandard" o! the community, conduct

!or in"tance, which ma&e" 0a moc&ery o! the inviolable "ocial in"titution or marriage "uch wa" the

ca"e in the ca"e at bar.