Digest: Blanquisco v. Austero-Bolilan (425 SCRA 470, 2004)

 

Facts: In a sworn letter-complaint dated April 17, 2002, spouses Arturo B. Blanquisco and Corazon Manalang-Blanquisco prayed that respondent, Atty. Asuncion Austero-Bolilan, Chief of the Office of the Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court of Tabaco City, Fifth Judicial Region, be dismissed from her position and disbarred from practicing the profession of law for grave abuse of authority, oppression, dishonesty, falsification of public document and violation of her lawyer's oath.

Issue: Whether Atty. Austero-Bolilan is liable.

Ruling:

Respondent invokes the case of Arias to support her contention that, even if she signed the certification without exhaustively checking the accuracy thereof, she should not be held liable because she had the right to rely on the work of her subordinates. Arias involves a different set of facts relating to allegations of a large-scale conspiracy involving several heads of offices and/or their deputies. Our ruling there that heads of offices can rely to a reasonable extent on their subordinates and on the good faith of those who prepare bids, purchase supplies or enter into negotiations is only applicable if the facts are similar to the Arias case. They are not.

 

This she did not do. Simple neglect signifies a disregard of a duty resulting from carelessness or indifference. A clerk of court, being an essential officer in the judicial system, is expected to be assiduous in performing his or her official duties. Negligence in the performance thereof warrants disciplinary action.

Lastly, while it is true that respondent should not perhaps be blamed for the erroneous act of the Register of Deeds of Albay in canceling the notice of lis pendens based alone on the certification she issued (inasmuch as any such cancellation required a court order under the Rules of Court), the fact remains that there was negligence on her part in issuing the subject certification.