Case Summary (A.M. No. P-11-2913)
Complaint Process and Investigation
Romero filed her sworn complaint on July 4, 2007. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) referred the case to Judge Apolinario M. Buaya on September 15, 2008, for investigation. The Investigating Judge submitted a report on January 18, 2010, which ultimately led to further evaluation by the OCA before being taken up by the court.
Facts of the Case
The underlying dispute stems from a civil case, Civil Case No. 462, in which Romero was awarded damages in a compromise agreement dated December 8, 2005. The spouses Valentin and Enriqueta Laurente committed to pay Romero a total of P30,000, with specific payment deadlines. While Romero received an initial payment of P10,000, the remaining P20,000 was not fully received as per the agreement.
Failure to Remit Amounts
After receiving partial payments, Villarosa was tasked with executing the writ of execution but faced allegations of misconduct. Notably, despite Villarosa attesting that he had received P20,000 from Enriqueta Laurente and confirming in a certification dated May 9, 2007, that the full amount had been paid, Romero disputed this claim, stating she had not received the full sum.
Allegations of Misconduct
Sheriff Villarosa initially denied wrongdoing but admitted to receiving various sums amounting to P13,000 from Enriqueta Laurente. He asserted that he remitted P10,000 to Romero and claimed that a remaining balance of P3,000 was given to the Clerk of Court, a statement which lacked credible support, leading to heightened suspicion regarding his handling of the funds.
Irregularities and Findings
The Investigating Judge identified multiple irregularities in Villarosa’s handling of the payments, noting discrepancies in the amounts he claimed to have turned over to Romero versus the amounts received from Enriqueta Laurente. This led to the conclusion that he failed to adhere to established protocols under Section 9 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court for executing judgments for monetary claims.
Legal Standards and Duties of a Sheriff
Under the pertinent rules, sheriffs are required to enforce judgments promptly and diligently, ensuring all payments are turned over to the Clerk of Court within the same day they are received. Failure to follow this protocol signifies grave abuse of authority and conduct unbecoming of a public servant.
Conclusions of the Court
Following a comprehensiv
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. P-11-2913)
Overview of the Case
- The case revolves around a sworn complaint filed by Ma. Chedna Romero against Pacifico B. Villarosa, Jr., a Sheriff IV of the Regional Trial Court, for grave abuse of authority, conduct unbecoming of a government employee, dishonesty, and estafa.
- The complaint was filed on July 4, 2007, due to Villarosa's failure to remit amounts owed to Romero as stipulated in a compromise agreement related to a claim for damages.
Background and Procedural History
- The complaint was referred to Judge Apolinario M. Buaya, the Executive Judge of the RTC of Ormoc City, for investigation and recommendation on April 21, 2008.
- The Investigating Judge submitted a report on January 18, 2010, which was evaluated and recommended by the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).
Facts of the Case
- Romero was the plaintiff in Civil Case No. 462 against the spouses Laurente, resulting in a compromise agreement approved by the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) on December 8, 2005.
- The agreement required the spouses Laurente to pay a total of P30,000.00, with P24,000.00 due by March 2006 and P6,000.00 by October 2006.
- Romero received an initial P10,000.00 on December 6, 2005, leading to further payments and complications regarding the remaining balance.
Allegations Against Sheriff Villarosa
- Sheriff Villarosa was accused of failing to remit the amounts received from the spouses Laurente to Romero.
- He admitted to collecting P13,000.00 from Enriqueta Laurente but only remitted P10,000.00 to Romero, claiming the remaining P3,000.00 was given to the Clerk of Court.
- Romero alleged that Villarosa demanded P1