Purisima Barba, complainant vs. Hector S.

Pedro, respondent
61 SCRA 484 December 26, 1974

Fernando, J.:

FACTS:

Respondent Hector Pedro was a successful BAR examinee in the 1956 BAR examinations who
obtained an average of 81.16%. But his subsequent taking of the Lawyer’s Oath was deferred
because of a complaint for IMMORALITY filed by the herein complainant Purisima Barba.

The complainant alleged that sometime in July 1953, the herein respondent came to her house and
with lewd designs succeeded in gratifying his carnal desires. The act was repeated three times
accompanied with pledges to marry the complainant, which resulted to her pregnancy and eventual
birth of a child. The respondent failed to comply his promise of marriage and took another woman,
instead to the altar of marriage. Thus, the respondent was barred from taking the lawyer’s oath.

The respondent filed a petition before the court for him to be allowed to take the Lawyer’s Oath
submitting therewith some testimonials from prominent individuals and organizations and an
affidavit of complainant Barba attesting to petitioner’s good conduct and behavior and expressing
that she no longer has any opposition to his taking his oath as a lawyer. The court resolved
allowing respondent Hector Pedro to take the lawyer’s oath. Unfortunately, before he could do so,
complainant Barba submitted a letter objecting to the said oath taking premised on the fact that the
affidavit she executed did not represent her true feelings thinking all along that the document she
executed was an affidavit of recognition of their daughter and not an affidavit of withdrawal on her
opposition of Mr. Pedro’s admission to the Bar. Once again, the Court suspended the effectivity of
the resolution.

Respondent denied the allegation of falsity concerning the affidavit of the complainant.
Complainant, on the other hand, was firm on her allegation that the respondent lacks good moral
character, as proven by her failure to marry her inspite of his being qualified to do the same at his
age of twenty seven.

ISSUE: Whether or not respondent Hector Pedro, be allowed to take the lawyer’s oath and
eventually practice law.

HELD:

Yes. 18 years had gone by from the time of the 1956 Bar examinations. He was a successful Bar
candidate but because of his lapse from moral propriety, he has not been allowed to take the
lawyer’s oath. It likewise appeared from the testimonials submitted, that he has behaved rather
well. The Court set aside its resolution suspending its previous resolution allowing Mr. Pedro to
take the lawyer’s oath and in accordance therewith, respondent Hector S. Pedro was allowed to
take the Lawyer’s Oath.