Title
Antolin vs. Quiroz
Case
A.M. No. RTJ-09-2186, RTJ-09-2187
Decision Date
Jul 14, 2009
A writ of execution was issued against PSPI, Signetics' subsidiary, despite a pending motion. Sheriffs enforced it, prompting administrative complaints against the judge and sheriffs, all dismissed for lack of merit or evidence.

Case Summary (A.M. No. RTJ-09-2186, RTJ-09-2187)

Background of the Case

These administrative complaints arise from a conflict stemming from the enforcement of a writ of execution in Civil Case No. 59264, where Judge Alex L. Quiroz of Branch 156 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City issued a writ following a court decision in favor of Fruehauf Electronics Philippines, Inc. The writ aimed to execute a judgment against Philips Semiconductors Philippines, Inc. (PSPI), which was identified as the local subsidiary of Signetics Corp., U.S.A. The contested order was issued on October 9, 2003, during Judge Quiroz's absence due to illness, and proceeded with implementation despite legal objections from the complainants, who claimed that the appellate court's decision was not yet final.

Legal Proceedings and Claims Made

The complainants filed a motion to set aside the October 9 order before the appellate court, arguing that the decision by the Court of Appeals permitting execution was not yet final and executory pending their motion for reconsideration. The complainants' allegations included that execution was carried out without the necessary motions being filed, and the issuance of the writ was done motu proprio while lacking a certified entry of judgment as mandated by the Rules of Court.

Responses and Initial Findings

Judge Quiroz defended his issuance of the writ by asserting it complied with the appellate court's directives. He contended that plaintiffs only needed to attach a certified copy of the judgment rather than an entry of judgment as purported by the complainants. The sheriffs Garrobo and Pangilinan echoed the view that their duty to implement the writ was ministerial and did not encompass discretion concerning its execution.

Court Evaluation and Resolution

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) investigated the matter and concluded that the administrative complaint was not the correct avenue to challenge Judge Quiroz’s order since judicial remedies were still viable. The issues presented were deemed too technical for administrative resolution, which led to the recommendation that the complaint against Judge Quiroz be dismissed. Conversely, charges against the responding sheriffs were referred for formal investigation due to the conflicting accounts regarding the execution of the writ.

Final Recommendations and Dismissal

The Court En Banc found merit in the recommendations of the OCA. Charges against Sheriff Garrobo and Sheriff Pangilinan were dismissed as they had acted in accordan

...continue reading

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.