Tapucar v.

Tapucar
Adm. Case No. 4148, July 30, 1998
Per curiam (en banc) / kmd

SUBJECT MATTER: The Lawyer and the legal profession; No conduct adversely affecting the
profession

FACTS:
In a letter complaint date November 22, 1993, Remedios Tapucar sought the
disbarment of her husband, Atty. Lauro Tapucar on the ground of continuing grossly
immoral conduct for cohabiting with Helen Pena under scandalous circumstances.
o Prior to this complaint, respondent was already administratively charged 4
times for conduct unbecoming an officer of the court.
Complainant and respondent were married on October 29, 1953 and resided in
Antipolo where 8 out of 11 children were born. *9 years after...
In 1962, they relocated to Dadiangas, Cotabato (now GenSan) where the last 3 children
were born. *8 + 3 = 11 children
In Dadiangas, he practiced his profession and was appointed as a CFI Judge in Butuan
City on January 30, 1976.
Shortly after his appointment (August 1976), he began cohabiting with Helen Pena in
Nasipit, Agusan del Norte. *after 1 year of cohabitation
Helen then gave birth to their first child on December 28, 1977.
In view of this cohabitation, Atty. Tranquilino filed an adm. complaint against
respondent for immorality which resulted to his 6-month suspension without pay.
*1st adm. charge v. Tapucar
However, respondent continued to cohabit with Helen giving rise to 3 subsequent adm.
cases which were consolidated and resulted to his dismissal as CFI judge.
* 2nd, 3rd, 4th adm, charges v. Tapucar
Despite his dismissal, he continued to cohabit with Helen who later on gave birth to
their second child on September 20, 1989. *12 years after 1st child
Respondent completely abandoned the complainant and his children by her.
Complainant and Helen moved back to Antipolo with their 2 children, and on March
5, 1992, the complainant contracted a marriage with Helen.
 o Nothing in the record shows the dissolution of 1st marriage therefore it was
presumed that 1st marriage still subsists.
Meanwhile, the complainant migrated to the US after her retirement however, her
children who also lived in Antipolo kept her posted of the misery they allegedly suffered
because of their fathers acts (e.g. deception & intrigues).
As a mother who wanted to protect her children, she filed this present petition for
disbarment, with her eldest daughter, Atty. Baua as her counsel.
The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline recommended that the respondent be
disbarred, which was later on approved and adopted by the IBP Board of Governors.
o This recommendation for disbarment was accepted by respondent with arrogance
and he mocked the law when he said, If now disbarred for marrying Ms. Helen
Pena will constitute triple jeopardy. If thats the law, so be it.

ISSUE: WON respondents actuations merit the penalty of disbarment. (YES)

HOLDING:
The Court agrees that the respondents actuations merit the penalty of disbarment.

It is a well settled rule that good moral character is not only a condition precedent to
admission to the legal profession, but it must also remain intact in order to maintain good
standing in that exclusive and honored fraternity.
Code of professional responsibility mandates that:
Rule 1.01 A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.

Rule 7.03 A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice
of law, nor should he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the
discredit of the legal profession.

The Court often reminds the members of the Bar to ALWAYS live up to the standards
and norms expected of the legal profession by upholding the ideals and tenets embodied in the
Code of Professional Responsibility.
 In this case, the respondent was grossly immoral when he kept a mistress, entered into a
marriage while a prior one subsists, and abandoned/mistreated complainant and her children.
These acts show his disregard of family obligations, morality and decency, the law and the
lawyers oath.
Also, despite previous sanctions, respondent continued his illicit liaison with a woman
other than his wife. He even exhibited a cavalier attitude and arrogance in the face of charges
against him. According to the Court, such misbehavior over a long period of time shows a
serious flaw in the respondents character, his moral indifference to scandal in the
community, and outright defiance of established norms.
Moreover, what aggravates his professional infraction is the fact that he was a judge. He
knew that a judges actuations ought to be free from any appearance of impropriety. As a
visible representation of law and justice, he should avoid the slightest infraction, lest be a
demoralizing example to others.
Similarly, attorney-at-law is also invested with public trust because of their role in
administration of justice. A high degree of moral integrity is expected of a lawyer in a
community. Therefore, he must maintain due regard of public decency.
On these considerations, disbar or suspend a lawyer for misconduct whether in his
professional or private capacity. Thus in this case, a strict but appropriate disciplinary action is
required for putting the legal profession in disrepute and place the integrity of the administration
of justice in peril.

Respondent is disbarred.
* for putting legal profession in disrepute and the administration of justice in peril.