Case Digest (A.M. No. P-03-1671)
Facts:
Antonio Rodriguez v. Vicente P. Aposaga, Jr., A.M. No. P-03-1671, January 31, 2005, Supreme Court Third Division, Carpio Morales, J., writing for the Court. Complainant Antonio Rodriguez sought the assistance of the Department of Justice by letter dated January 28, 2002, complaining about difficulties in the execution of a favorable judgment and the burden of alleged execution expenses; the DOJ referred the letter to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) by indorsement of February 8, 2002. The OCA, by indorsement of February 22, 2002, requested comment from respondent Vicente P. Aposaga, Jr., Sheriff IV of Branch 24, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Sibugay, Zamboanga.The underlying civil suit was Civil Case No. I-194, Antonio Rodriguez v. Elmer Raagas, in which Branch 24, RTC of Sibugay rendered judgment for Rodriguez on April 15, 1999, ordering rescission of a memorandum of agreement and monetary reliefing totaling P65,400.00 plus costs. The judgment debtor appealed to the Court of Appeals, which dismissed the appeal for failure to file appellant’s brief; the record returned to the trial court on December 11, 2001. On Rodriguez’s motion the trial court ordered execution and a writ of execution issued.
Respondent sheriff reported that the writ could not be immediately enforced because the judgment debtor had transferred residence; respondent located real property in the debtor’s name in the local Registry of Deeds and advised complainant to prepare an estimated amount of at least P10,000.00 to cover the notation of the Notice of Levy and expenses for the execution sale (posting, publication in Pagadian City, travel, etc.), promising to return any excess and to charge incurred expenses as costs against the judgment debtor. Complainant did not provide the amount. Respondent later requested P75.00 for the Sheriff’s General Fund and Judicial Development Fund (JDF) and estimated travel expenses; complainant again failed to respond. Respondent asserts that, with assistance of a friend, he nonetheless caused registration of the Notice of Levy and that the delay in execution was not attributable to him.
The OCA evaluated the matter and found that respondent admitted demanding P10,000 directly from the judgment creditor without securing the court’s prior approval, thereby violating Section 9 of Rule 141 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; the OCA recommended a fine of P2,000.00 and a stern warning. This matter was re-docketed by the Court on December 18, 2002 as a regular administrative case and the parties were given 20 days to state whether they submitted the case for resolution on the record. Complainant did not reply; respondent filed a manifestation (received March 13, 2003) attaching a return of execution dated August 6, 2002 and a Certificate of Sale dated August 2, 2002, and prayed for dismissal.
Issues:
- Did respondent Sheriff Vicente P. Aposaga, Jr. commit an administrative violation by demanding execution expenses directly from the judgment creditor without securing the court’s approval in violation of Section 9 of Rule 141 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure?
- If a violation occurred, what disciplinary sanction is appropriate?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)