Scribd
Upload
398 views1 page

Arciga V Maniwang (Gross Immoral Conduct)

Segundino Maniwang and Magdalena Arciga had an on-again, off-again romantic relationship from 1970-1975, during which time they engaged in repeated acts of cohabitation. In 1973, Magdalena became pregnant with Segundino's child. Segundino convinced Magdalena's father to defer their church wedding until after he passed the bar exam. However, after passing the bar in 1975, Segundino stopped communicating with Magdalena and married another woman instead. Magdalena filed a complaint seeking to have Segundino disbarred for gross immoral conduct. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the complaint, finding that while Segundino's actions were wrong, his refusal to marry

Uploaded by

Struggler 369
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
398 views1 page

Arciga V Maniwang (Gross Immoral Conduct)

Segundino Maniwang and Magdalena Arciga had an on-again, off-again romantic relationship from 1970-1975, during which time they engaged in repeated acts of cohabitation. In 1973, Magdalena became pregnant with Segundino's child. Segundino convinced Magdalena's father to defer their church wedding until after he passed the bar exam. However, after passing the bar in 1975, Segundino stopped communicating with Magdalena and married another woman instead. Magdalena filed a complaint seeking to have Segundino disbarred for gross immoral conduct. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the complaint, finding that while Segundino's actions were wrong, his refusal to marry

Uploaded by

Struggler 369
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Arciga v.

Maniwang
A.M. No. 1608 August 14, 1981

IMPORTANT PEOPLE:
Magdalena T. Arciga – medical technology student from Cebu Institute of Medicine
Segundino D. Maniwang – Law student from San Jose Recoletos College

FACTS:
▪ They got acquainted sometime in October 1970 at Cebu City.
▪ They became sweethearts but when Magdalena refused to have a tryst with Segundino in a motel in January
1971, Segundino stopped visiting her.
▪ Their paths crossed again during a Valentine's Day party in the following month. They renewed their relationship.
▪ When Segundino asked Magdalena why she had refused his earlier proposal to have sexual intercourse with him,
she jokingly said that she was in love with another man and that she had a child with still another man.
▪ They had repeated acts of cohabitation. Segundino started telling his acquaintances that he and Magdalena were
secretly married.
▪ In 1972, Segundino transferred to Davao del Sur where he continued his law studies. Magdalena stayed in Cebu,
but their relationship continued.
▪ In 1973, Magdalena got pregnant. Segundino convinced Magdalena's father to have the church wedding deferred
until after he had passed the bar exams.
▪ In 1975, Segundino passed the bar exams. After which, he stopped communicating with Magdalena.
▪ Magdalena then found out that Segundino married another woman. She confronted the wife, and this irked
Segundino to inflict physical injuries upon Magdalena.
▪ Magdalena filed a disbarment case against Segundino grounded on gross immoral conduct.
▪ Segundino admitted that he is the father of Magdalena’s child; that he did promise to marry Magdalena many
times; that he broke those promises because of Magdalena’s shady past because apparently Magdalena had an
illegitimate child even before her son with Segundino was born.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Segundino should be disbarred and be held liable for gross immoral conduct.

SUPREME COURT RULING:


▪ An applicant for admission to the bar should have good moral character. He is required to produce before this
Court satisfactory evidence of good moral character and that no charges against him, involving moral turpitude,
have been filed or are pending in any court.
▪ If good moral character is a sine qua non for admission to the bar, then the continued possession of good moral
character is also a requisite for retaining membership in the legal profession. Membership in the bar may be
terminated when a lawyer ceases to have good moral character.
▪ A lawyer may be disbarred for grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude. A member of the bar should have moral integrity in addition to professional probity.
▪ It is difficult to state with precision and to fix an inflexible standard as to what is "grossly immoral conduct" or to
specify the moral delinquency and obliquity which render a lawyer unworthy of continuing as a member of the
bar. The rule implies that what appears to be unconventional behavior to the straight-laced may not be the
immoral conduct that warrants disbarment.
▪ Immoral conduct has been defined as "that conduct which is willful, flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a
moral indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable members of the community".
▪ Court found that respondent's refusal to marry the complainant was not so corrupt nor unprincipled as to warrant
disbarment. The complaint for disbarment against the respondent is hereby dismissed.

You might also like