G.R. No. 95122 - Board of Commissioners vs. Hon. Joselito Dela Rosa, Presiding Judge, RTC Manila, Branch 29

Lorenzo Shipping Corporation (LSC) is a domestic shipping company operating interisland vessels.
Cebu Arrastre & Stevedoring Services Corporation (CASSCOR) handled LSC’s cargo under a March 8, 1997 Cargo Handling Contract.
On February 20, 1997, Guerrero G. Dajao, as CASSCOR President, executed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Serafin Cabanlit and Florencio Villarin to subcontract arrastre and stevedoring operations.
Profit-sharing under the MOA: 5% to CASSCOR, 2% royalty to Dajao, 10% for expenses/taxes, 10% to Philippine Ports Authority, and 73% claimed by Villarin/Cabanlit.

July 1999 onwards, Villarin/Cabanlit alleged non-remittance of proceeds and filed in RTC Cebu City Civil Case No. CEB-25283 a Complaint for specific performance, accounting, damages, and prayed for preliminary attachment and mandatory injunction, impleading LSC as nominal defendant.
June 21, 2000: RTC Branch 5 issued a writ of preliminary attachment against CASSCOR and Dajao upon bond. The case later raffled to Branch 6.
May 11, 2004: RTC Branch 6 granted Villarin’s motion for preliminary attachment and required a ₱150,000 bond. LSC moved for clarification; both LSC and CASSCOR filed counter-bonds, discharging the attachment.
June 16, 2004: Judge Caminade clarified that the attachment writ applied to all defendants, including LSC. LSC sought certiorari with the Court of Appeals.
November 23, 2004: Villarin moved in RTC Branch 20 to require LSC to deposit in court ₱10,297,499.59, supported by an audit and a letter from LSC’s VP for Finance.
August 12, 2005: RTC Branch 20 ordered LSC to deposit the stated amount in a joint court account.
March 9, 2006 and May 30, 2006: Branch 20 granted LSC’s motion for reconsideration, set aside the deposit order, and denied execution. Villarin’s motion for reconsideration was likewise denied.

CA in CEB-SP-01855 (Deposit Case) on September 7, 2006, annulled the RTC Branch 20 reconsideration orders and reinstated the August 12, 2005 deposit order; denied LSC’s motion in a May 30, 2006 Resolution.
CA in SP-86333 (Attachment Case) on April 24, 2007, dismissed LSC’s certiorari petition, upholding the June 16, 2004 order subjecting LSC to attachment; denied reconsideration in a July 6, 2007 Resolution.
The Supreme Court consolidated G.R. Nos. 175727 (Deposit) and 178713 (Attachment) and elevated both petitions for review on certiorari under Rule 45.

Whether the CA gravely abused its discretion in upholding the RTC’s extension of the preliminary attachment writ to LSC, a nominal defendant with no privity of contract or fiduciary obligation to Villarin.

Whether the CA gravely abused its discretion in reversing RTC Branch 20’s setting aside of the deposit order, thereby compelling LSC, a nominal defendant, to deposit ₱10,297,499.59 in court under Rule 135 when no provisional remedy covers such deposit.