Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

Nelson Valdez vs Atty Dabon

Facts: This is a case abpit gross immorality, gross violation

and falsification filed by Nelson Valdez against Atty. Antolin
Dabon who had an illicit relationship with Sonia Valdez,
Nelsons wife.
June 8 2006, Process server Fernando Sia made a report but
failed to serve a copy upon respondent because the house
maid refused to receive the same(Pandacan, Manila). Sia
also went to the provincial address at Greenfield Subd,
Fernando Pampanga but was not allowed to enter. He was
informed that respondent left for the US.
June 16, 2006 the investing Justice cancelled the preliminary
conference and directed respondent to submit his Answer
within 15 days or else case shall be deemed submitted.
Letter was submitted to respondents address in the US.
June 23, 2006, Pamela Antonio informed Clerk Court that
Atty Dabon is always out thus failed delivery attempts.
June 28, 2006 an ex parte motion to refer for question
documents and fingerprint examination attached exhibits
was filed due to nude photos his wife, Sonia Valdez, was
sent to hum from Nenita Palupayon.
November 14, 2006, complaint filed ex-parte manifestation
and motion claiming that respondent successfully held
abeyance the proceedings by his refusal to receive and
comply with the process.
Nov 30, 2006, it was reported respondent no longer lives in
Pampanga and in Pandacan.
Sia then went to respondents house in Pandacan and left the
envelope underneath the door and went to Greenfields,

Pampanga and left the envelope to the guards. Both

envelopes were returned to the CA via LBC and both
Nelson alleged that his wife, Sonia, admitted to him that she
engaged in an adulterous and immoral relationship with
Atty. Dabon since Nov 2000. In 2006 she tried to end
relationship but respondent disagreed thus threatened and
harassed Sonia. Nelson alleged that one day after complaint
was filed the respondent fled to the US without a travel
authority from the SC. Respondent and his wife sent text
messages to apologise to petitioner and his wife.
Issue: WON respondent violated Adm. Matter No. 99-12-08SC when he left for the United States before his travel
authority could be issued and gross immoral conduct.
Held: Yes
There is no dispute that respondent engaged in an unlawful,
dishonest and immoral conduct. The illicit relationship which
spanned a period of five years was committed under
scandalous circumstances as to shock the common sense of
decency. As a Division Clerk of Court of the Court of Appeals,
respondent occupied a position of great responsibility.
Atty. Dabon left for theUnited States before the approval of
his application for leave by the authorized official of the
Personnel Division. Moreover, respondents application for
leave did not indicate the type of leave he is taking,
whether vacation or sick leave, or whether the leave will be
spent here or abroad. Respondent likewise violated the
resolution in Adm. Matter No. 99-12-08-SC requiring
employees of the judiciary to obtain a travel authority from
this Court before traveling abroad