FLORENCE TEVES MACARRUBO, the Minors JURIS ALEXIS T. MACARRUBO and GABRIEL ENRICO T. MACARRUBO as represented by their Mother/Guardian, FLORENCE TEVES MACARRUBO, complainant, v. ATTY. EDMUNDO L. MACARRUBO, respondent.
A.C. No. 6148. February 27, 2004.
Facts:
Florence Teves Macarrubo, complainant, filed on June 6, 2000 a verified complaint for disbarment against Atty. Edmundo L. Macarubbo,respondent, with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines alleging that respondent deceived her into marrying him despite his prior subsisting marriage with a certain Helen Esparza. The complainant averred that he started courting her in April 1991, he representing himself as a bachelor; that they eventually contracted marriage which was celebrated on two occasions administered by Rev. Rogelio J. Bolivar, the first on December 18, 1991 in the latter’s Manila office, and the second on December 28, 1991 at the Asian Institute of Tourism Hotel in Quezon City; and that although respondent admitted that he was married to Helen Esparza on June 16, 1982, he succeeded in convincing complainant, her family and friends that his previous marriage was void.
Complainant further averred that respondent entered into a third marriage with one Josephine T. Constantino; and that he abandoned complainant and their children without providing them any regular support up to the present time, leaving them in precarious living conditions.
Respondent denied employing deception in his marriage to complainant, insisting instead that complainant was fully aware of his prior subsisting marriage to Helen Esparza, but that she dragged him against his will to a “sham wedding” to protect her and her family’s reputation since she was then three-months pregnant. He submitted in evidence that in the civil case “Edmundo L. Macarubbo v. Florence J. Teves,” it declared his marriage to complainant void ab initio. He drew attention to the trial court’s findings on the basis of his evidence which was not controverted, that the marriage was indeed “a sham and make believe” one, “vitiated by fraud, deceit, force and intimidation, and further exacerbated by the existence of a legal impediment” and want of a valid marriage license. Respondent raised the additional defenses that the judicial decree of annulment of his marriage to complainant is res judicata upon the present administrative case; that complainant is in estoppel for admitting her status as mere live-in partner to respondent in her letter to Josephine T. Constantino. Stressing that he had always been the victim in his marital relations, respondent invoked the final and executory August 21, 1998 in the case “Edmundo L. Macarubbo v. Helen C. Esparza,” declaring his first marriage void on the ground of his wife’s psychological incapacity.
It is recommended that respondent Atty. Edmundo L. Macarrubo be suspended for three months for gross misconduct reflecting unfavorably on the moral norms of the profession. The IBP Board of Governors adopted and approved the Report and Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner.
Issue:
Whether or not the respondent should be suspended for gross misconduct
Ruling:
While the marriage between complainant and respondent has been annulled by final judgment, this does not cleanse his conduct of every tinge of impropriety. He and complainant started living as husband and wife in December 1991 when his first marriage was still subsisting, as it was only on August 21, 1998 that such first marriage was annulled, rendering him liable for concubinage. Such conduct is inconsistent with the good moral character that is required for the continued right to practice law as a member of the Philippine bar. Even assuming that respondent was coerced by complainant to marry her, the duress, by his own admission as the following transcript of his testimony reflects, ceased after their wedding day, respondent having freely cohabited with her and even begot a second child by her. Thus, respondent Edmundo L. Macarubbo is found guilty of gross immorality and is hereby disbarred from the practice of law.
