Case Digest (G.R. No. 4855)
Facts:
The case of Isabelo Artacho vs. Tan Chu Chay, Jas. C. Jenkins, and Antonio Sison revolves around an original action of certiorari filed by the plaintiff, Isabelo Artacho, against the defendants, which include Tan Chu Chay, the judge of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, and Antonio Sison, the sheriff of the same province. The events leading to this case began when a judgment was rendered in favor of Tan Chu Chay against Artacho for the amount of P3,430, along with interest and costs. This judgment was subsequently affirmed by a higher court, and execution was ordered, which was then assigned to Sheriff Antonio Sison for enforcement. Upon receiving the execution order, Sheriff Sison demanded payment from Artacho, who refused, claiming that the debt owed to Tan Chu Chay had already been legally attached by the sheriff of Manila in a separate suit initiated by a creditor of Tan Chu Chay. In response to Artacho's refusal to pay, the judge of the Court of First Instanc...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 4855)
Facts:
- Judgment in Favor of Tan Chu Chay: A judgment was entered in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan in favor of Tan Chu Chay against Isabelo Artacho for the sum of P3,430, with interest and costs.
- Affirmation by the Supreme Court: The judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court, and the case was remanded to the Court of First Instance for execution.
- Execution and Demand by Sheriff: The sheriff, Antonio Sison, demanded payment from Artacho, who refused, claiming that the debt had been legally attached by the sheriff of Manila in a separate suit brought by a creditor of Tan Chu Chay.
- Second Execution Ordered: The judge of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan ordered the issuance of a second execution upon the judgment.
- Certiorari and Injunction: Artacho filed an original action of certiorari in the Supreme Court, seeking to restrain the levy of the second execution, arguing that the judge exceeded his jurisdiction.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- (Unlock)
Ratio:
- Jurisdiction of the Court: The Court of First Instance of Pangasinan retained jurisdiction over the case despite the attachment of the debt by the sheriff of Manila. Jurisdiction, once acquired, is not lost unless expressly revoked or ousted by law.
- Proper Remedy: Certiorari is not the appropriate remedy when the court has jurisdiction over the case and the subject matter. Artacho may pursue other legal remedies, such as an action under section 120 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to prevent double payment.
- Finality of Judgment: The judgment in favor of Tan Chu Chay was final and executory, and the issuance of a second execution was within the court's authority.