Title
Ala vs. Peras
Case
A.M. No. RTJ-11-2283
Decision Date
Nov 16, 2011
A lawyer alleges judicial interference and negligence by judges, clerks, and sheriffs in enforcing a writ of execution; complaints dismissed except for reprimands for neglect of duty.

Case Digest (A.M. No. RTJ-11-2283)

Facts:

Background of the Case: Atty. Leticia E. Ala (complainant) was the former counsel of Adelaida Alba-Chua in a nullity of marriage case filed in Quezon City. A partial judgment was issued on August 12, 2003, based on a compromise agreement, wherein Benson Go Chua (Chua) agreed to assume payment of complainant’s professional fees. Complainant successfully obtained a writ of execution for her fees, and the execution was partially implemented.

Implementation of the Writ of Execution:
Sheriff El Cid Caballes (respondent Sheriff Caballes) attempted to enforce the writ in Cebu City but faced challenges. Eventually, a levy was made on Chua’s conjugal home in Cebu City, scheduled for public auction on November 9, 2006.

Injunction Case Filed:
Before the auction, VTL Realty Corporation filed Civil Case No. CEB-32893 for Injunction and Damages, claiming ownership of the property due to a previous foreclosure sale. The case was assigned to Judge Simeon P. Dumdum, Jr. (respondent Judge Dumdum), who issued a 72-hour TRO to halt the auction. Despite the TRO, the property was sold to complainant as the highest bidder.

Subsequent Proceedings:
The case was re-raffled to Judge Generosa G. Labra (respondent Judge Labra), who denied complainant’s motion to dismiss. The case was eventually assigned to Judge Soliver C. Peras (respondent Judge Peras), who issued a writ of preliminary injunction to prevent the issuance of a new title in complainant’s name. Complainant alleged that the respondents acted in bad faith, violated judicial protocols, and caused delays in the proceedings.

Issues:

  • Whether respondents Judges Peras, Dumdum, and Labra grossly violated judicial protocols by interfering with the execution of a judgment from a co-equal court.
  • Whether respondent Clerk of Court Joaquino was remiss in his duties by failing to ensure the payment of the injunction bond and by ignoring formal inquiries.
  • Whether respondent Sheriffs Caballes and Viovicente were negligent in their duties in implementing the writ of execution and in failing to furnish complainant with copies of relevant documents.
  • Whether the request for transfer of venue of Civil Case No. CEB-32893 should be granted.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.