SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

A.C. No. 905 May 30, 1975

HERMOGENES G. MENDOZA, Complainant, vs. ATTY. ARSENIO R. REYES, Respondent.chanrobles virtual law library

BARREDO, J.:

Respondent is charged with having notarizes an affidavit before the same had been signed by complainant who in fact refused to sign the same. Respondent denied having signed the alleged notarization. Upon proper investigation the Solicitor General has come to the conclusion that the complainant has failed to prove that the signature in question is that of respondent.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Going over the records, We find the report, of the Solicitor General to be in order. The circumstances on record show that complainant must have a personal motive in charging respondent but failed to prosecute the case properly. He repeatedly failed to appear at the hearing. As a matter of fact, his cross-examination could not be finished because of his absence, and the case had to be submitted for decision without his testimony being completed.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, this case is dismissed and respondent is exonerated.