A.M. No. P-03-1703 (formerly OCA IPI-02-1436-P) - EDNA FE F. AQUINO, COMPLAINANT, VS. JOSE R. MARTIN, SHERIFF IV RESOLUTION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, the Investigating Judge set the case for hearing. The documentary evidence submitted by the complainant show that because of the unjustified refusal of the respondent to take action on the writs of execution in Civil Cases Nos. 19-928 and 2239, she referred the matter to then Clerk of Court Atty. Raymundo B. Meris. [5] The latter, in turn, issued Memo No. 01-2001 of 8 July 2001 directing the respondent to implement the writs of execution issued in favor of EMI. [6] Respondent, however, failed to comply with that memorandum. This prompted the legal counsel of the complainant to send to the respondent a letter demanding the immediate implementation of the said writs of execution and the three other writs in Civil Cases Nos. 2306, 2336, and 2279, as well as the submission of periodic monthly reports on the writs. [7] The demand having been unheeded, the complainant filed this complaint against the respondent with the Office of the Court Administrator. [8] For his part, the respondent presented as evidence his own affidavit [9] and that of Nelson Domingo. [10] In his affidavit, he claimed that he did his best to implement the writs of execution in Civil Cases Nos. 2239 and 19-928 for several times, during which he was accompanied by Nelson Domingo, then EMI's Collector. They, however, failed to collect even a single centavo because the judgment debtors refused to pay in cash. Neither could they find any personal or real property of the judgment debtors upon which to levy. However, he finally levied a Kia Pride in the possession of the judgment debtor in Civil Case No. 2239, as shown in the Sheriff's Report of 25 September 2002 [11] and Sheriff's Notice of Levy and Auction Sale by Execution of 8 October 2002. [12] When he tried to implement the writ of execution in the two civil cases, he found out that the necessary legal fees for their implementation were not yet paid, but he still tried his best to implement the writs. As for the other writs of execution, respondent denied having received them. Nelson Domingo stated in his affidavit that he is presently the Branch Manager of EMI in Santiago City and that he is aware that Sheriff Martin did his best to implement the writs of execution in Civil Cases Nos. 2239 and 19-928 because he personally accompanied the latter in executing the writs in his capacity as then EMI's Collection Agent. He added that they failed to collect because the judgment debtors questioned the liquidated damages and that the judgment debtor in Civil Case No. 19-928 promised to settle his obligation and to see a lawyer regarding the mode of payment. To rebut respondent's sworn statement that the judgment debtors in Civil Case No. 19-928 did not have any property upon which to levy, the complainant submitted tax declarations [13] in their name showing that they have two parcels of land in Rizal, Santiago City. She also presented Official Receipt MVRR No. 86040821 [14] dated 17 July 2001 to prove that the KIA Pride with