ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
April-1995 Jurisprudence                 

  • Adm. Case No. 2125 April 3, 1995 : ENRIQUE M. REYES vs. LEOPOLDO T. MAGLAYA

  • G.R. No. 108017 April 3, 1995 : MARIA BENITA A. DULAY vs. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 102969 April 4, 1995 : GENERAL TEXTILE, INC., ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109910 April 5, 1995 : REMEDIOS G. SALVADOR, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114250 April 5, 1995 : DOMINICO C. CONGSON vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115644 April 5, 1995 : GOLDEN FLAME SAWMILL vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. 92-7-360-0 April 6, 1995 : IN RE: INDORSEMENT OF FERNANDO DE LEON

  • Adm. Matter No. 93-2-037 SC April 6, 1995 : IN RE EMIL "Emiliano" P. JURADO

  • Adm. Matter No. P-93-942 April 6, 1995 : JOVITA R. CASAL vs. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR.

  • G.R. No. 80914 April 6, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. AMABLE FLORES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108747 April 6, 1995 : PABLO C. FRANCISCO vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114222 April 6, 1995 : FRANCISCO S. TATAD, ET AL. vs. JESUS B. GARCIA, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115504 April 6, 1995 : ANTONIO R. DANAO vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116801 April 6, 1995 : GLORIA G. LASTIMOSA vs. CONRADO VASQUEZ, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-95-1018 April 18, 1995 : ROGELIO L. SULE vs. JONATHAN S. BITENG

  • G.R. No. 104133 April 18, 1995 : SPS. EMILIO AND MILAGROS ABINUJAR vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112889 April 18, 1995 : BIENVENIDO O. MARQUEZ, JR. vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-95-1305 April 21, 1995 : DAN ALCANTARA vs. CAMILO E. TAMIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69203 April 21, 1995 : ENRICO MANUEL vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80611 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. GIL PARICA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95711 April 21, 1995 : CITY FAIR CORPORATION vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 102981-82 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. TEODORO ESMALE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105998 April 21, 1995 : F.R.F. ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108997 April 21, 1995 : LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 111944-47 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. EDUARDO G. MONTEFALCON

  • G.R. No. 112087 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ALEXANDER B. SOAN

  • G.R. Nos. 112178-79 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. AIDA HONRADA

  • G.R. No. 112518 April 21, 1995 : CARLOS CABALLERO vs. ANTONIO P. SOLANO

  • G.R. No. 114714 April 21, 1995 : MARITIME MANNING AGENCIES, INC.ET AL. vs. POEA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116637 April 21, 1995 : COCA-COLA SALESFORCE UNION, ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-962 April 24, 1995 : FERNANDO MARCELINO vs. MARIANO M. SINGSON, JR.

  • G.R. No. 118861 April 27, 1995 : EMMANUEL M. RELAMPAGOS vs. ROSITA C. CUMBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116246 April 27, 1995 : BENJAMIN R. ERNI vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Case No. 2125 April 3, 1995 : ENRIQUE M. REYES vs. LEOPOLDO T. MAGLAYA

  • G.R. No. 108017 April 3, 1995 : MARIA BENITA A. DULAY vs. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 102969 April 4, 1995 : GENERAL TEXTILE, INC., ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109910 April 5, 1995 : REMEDIOS G. SALVADOR, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114250 April 5, 1995 : DOMINICO C. CONGSON vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115644 April 5, 1995 : GOLDEN FLAME SAWMILL vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. 92-7-360-0 April 6, 1995 : IN RE: INDORSEMENT OF FERNANDO DE LEON

  • Adm. Matter No. 93-2-037 SC April 6, 1995 : IN RE EMIL "Emiliano" P. JURADO

  • Adm. Matter No. P-93-942 April 6, 1995 : JOVITA R. CASAL vs. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR.

  • G.R. No. 80914 April 6, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. AMABLE FLORES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108747 April 6, 1995 : PABLO C. FRANCISCO vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114222 April 6, 1995 : FRANCISCO S. TATAD, ET AL. vs. JESUS B. GARCIA, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115504 April 6, 1995 : ANTONIO R. DANAO vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116801 April 6, 1995 : GLORIA G. LASTIMOSA vs. CONRADO VASQUEZ, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-914 April 10, 1995 : DOLORES ALFORTE vs. RUTH C. SANTOS

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-95-1018 April 18, 1995 : ROGELIO L. SULE vs. JONATHAN S. BITENG

  • G.R. No. 104133 April 18, 1995 : SPS. EMILIO AND MILAGROS ABINUJAR vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112889 April 18, 1995 : BIENVENIDO O. MARQUEZ, JR. vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-95-1305 April 21, 1995 : DAN ALCANTARA vs. CAMILO E. TAMIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69203 April 21, 1995 : ENRICO MANUEL vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80611 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. GIL PARICA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95711 April 21, 1995 : CITY FAIR CORPORATION vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 102981-82 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. TEODORO ESMALE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105998 April 21, 1995 : F.R.F. ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108997 April 21, 1995 : LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 111944-47 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. EDUARDO G. MONTEFALCON

  • G.R. No. 112087 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ALEXANDER B. SOAN

  • G.R. Nos. 112178-79 April 21, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. AIDA HONRADA

  • G.R. No. 112518 April 21, 1995 : CARLOS CABALLERO vs. ANTONIO P. SOLANO

  • G.R. No. 114714 April 21, 1995 : MARITIME MANNING AGENCIES, INC.ET AL. vs. POEA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116637 April 21, 1995 : COCA-COLA SALESFORCE UNION, ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-962 April 24, 1995 : FERNANDO MARCELINO vs. MARIANO M. SINGSON, JR.

  • G.R. No. 118861 April 27, 1995 : EMMANUEL M. RELAMPAGOS vs. ROSITA C. CUMBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116246 April 27, 1995 : BENJAMIN R. ERNI vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Case No. 2125 April 3, 1995 - ENRIQUE M. REYES v. LEOPOLDO T. MAGLAYA

  • G.R. No. 108017 April 3, 1995 - MARIA BENITA A. DULAY v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 102969 April 4, 1995 - GENERAL TEXTILE, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109910 April 5, 1995 - REMEDIOS G. SALVADOR, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114250 April 5, 1995 - DOMINICO C. CONGSON v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115644 April 5, 1995 - GOLDEN FLAME SAWMILL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. 92-7-360-0 April 6, 1995 - IN RE: INDORSEMENT OF FERNANDO DE LEON

  • Adm. Matter No. 93-2-037 SC April 6, 1995 - IN RE EMIL (Emiliano) P. JURADO

  • Adm. Matter No. P-93-942 April 6, 1995 - JOVITA R. CASAL v. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR.

  • G.R. No. 80914 April 6, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMABLE FLORES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108747 April 6, 1995 - PABLO C. FRANCISCO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109713 April 6, 1995 - JOSE M. MERCADO v. BOARD OF ELECTION SUPERVISORS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114222 April 6, 1995 - FRANCISCO S. TATAD, ET AL. v. JESUS B. GARCIA, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115504 April 6, 1995 - ANTONIO R. DANAO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116801 April 6, 1995 - GLORIA G. LASTIMOSA v. CONRADO VASQUEZ, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-914 April 10, 1995 - DOLORES ALFORTE v. RUTH C. SANTOS

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-94-1160 April 10, 1995 - ALEXANDER VITO v. TEOFILO BUSLON, JR.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-95-1018 April 18, 1995 - ROGELIO L. SULE v. JONATHAN S. BITENG

  • G.R. No. 104133 April 18, 1995 - SPS. EMILIO AND MILAGROS ABINUJAR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112889 April 18, 1995 - BIENVENIDO O. MARQUEZ, JR. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-95-1305 April 21, 1995 - DAN ALCANTARA v. CAMILO E. TAMIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69203 April 21, 1995 - ENRICO MANUEL v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80611 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GIL PARICA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95711 April 21, 1995 - CITY FAIR CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 102981-82 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO ESMALE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105998 April 21, 1995 - F.R.F. ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108997 April 21, 1995 - LUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 111944-47 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO G. MONTEFALCON

  • G.R. No. 112087 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEXANDER B. SOAN

  • G.R. Nos. 112178-79 April 21, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AIDA HONRADA

  • G.R. No. 112518 April 21, 1995 - CARLOS CABALLERO v. ANTONIO P. SOLANO

  • G.R. No. 114714 April 21, 1995 - MARITIME MANNING AGENCIES, INC.ET AL. v. POEA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116637 April 21, 1995 - COCA-COLA SALESFORCE UNION, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMM., ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-94-962 April 24, 1995 - FERNANDO MARCELINO v. MARIANO M. SINGSON, JR.

  • G.R. No. 118861 April 27, 1995 - EMMANUEL M. RELAMPAGOS v. ROSITA C. CUMBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116246 April 27, 1995 - BENJAMIN R. ERNI v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  •  





     
     

    Adm. Matter No. P-93-942   April 6, 1995 - JOVITA R. CASAL v. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR.

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [Adm. Matter No. P-93-942. April 6, 1995.]

    JOVITA R. CASAL, Complainant, v. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR., Deputy Sheriff, Regional Trial Court, Branch 78, Quezon City, Respondent.

    Gaudioso C . de Lunas for complainant.

    H . Fabre Luna for Respondent.


    SYLLABUS


    1. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW; COURT PERSONNEL; SHERIFFS; PRIMARILY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT IMPLEMENTATION OF WRITS OF EXECUTION TO PREVENT DELAY AND MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE; CASE AT BAR. — A sheriff is primarily responsible for the speedy and efficient implementation of writs of execution to prevent delay and miscarriage of justice. Respondent dismally failed in his duty. Respondent failed to account for the monies he got from complainant. A perusal of his statement of account to liquidate the advances, shows that some expenses were exorbitant and were not covered by receipts. He also failed to controvert Atty. de Lunas testimony regarding the separate advances he made for such expenditures. We reiterate our ruling in Tan v. Herras, 195 SCRA 1 (1991), that a sheriff cannot receive gratuities and voluntary payments from parties he is ordered to assist in the course of his duties. We deplore respondents lackadaisical deportment from the inception of this case, when he failed to appear and testify in the hearings. The evidence of the complainant therefore remained unrebutted. A certification issued by the Branch Clerk of Court of Quezon City attested that respondent had not been reporting for work since October 29, 1993 (Rollo, p. 64). Respondents letter of resignation dated January 31, 1994 was received by the Office of the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City only on May 11, 1994. The resignation letter does not alter the fact that he had abandoned his office for failing to report for work or to file the appropriate leave. His absence without official leave, during the investigation of the administrative case against him, is indicative of his guilt in the same way as flight in criminal cases.


    D E C I S I O N


    PER CURIAM:


    This is an administrative complaint against respondent Francisco Concepcion, Jr., Deputy Sheriff of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 78, Quezon City, for dereliction of duty and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

    I


    Complainant was the plaintiff in Civil Case No. 48859, titled “Jovita R. Casal v. Spouses Nicolas Laude and Ligaya Laude,” filed with the Regional Trial Court, Branch 78, Quezon City. A decision was rendered based on a compromise agreement entered into by the parties and respondent was deputized to implement the writ of execution.

    To facilitate the implementation of the writ, complainant gave respondent on separate occasions a total amount of P23,190.00 (Rollo, p. 40). Some payments were covered by receipts (Rollo, pp. 7-11). Notwithstanding the amounts paid, respondent failed to fully implement the writ and alias writs of execution issued by the court.

    At respondent’s demand for an additional P10,000.00, complainant remitted P3,000.00 on March 29, 1993 and promised to pay the balance upon the eviction of all the tenants. Subsequently, complainant was forced to part with an additional P6,000.00. After receipt thereof, respondent disappeared.

    Complainant was compelled to move for the appointment of a special sheriff to implement the alias writ of execution in the said case (Rollo, p. 12).

    On May 21, 1993, complainant executed and filed a complaint-affidavit against respondent (Rollo, p. 5). In his comment, respondent denied the charges. He attributed the delay in the eviction of all the tenants to the motion to quash the alias writ dated June 14, 1991 and the expiration of the life of said writ.

    Respondent further alleged that he had an understanding with complainant that he would only eject a few tenants, in the hope that the other tenants would voluntarily vacate the premises thereafter. He claimed that he was successful in the partial execution of the judgment, as evidenced by the sheriff’s partial returns dated December 19, 1991, January 31, 1992 and November 25, 1992.

    Anent the implementation of the fourth alias writ of execution, respondent was able to partially implement the same only with respect to a few tenants since the houses of the other tenants were padlocked. He could not execute any further without an order of demolition (Rollo, p. 32).

    Respondent denied pocketing the money paid by complainant. In his statement of account, respondent listed how the monies were spent for the transportation and meals of the helpers (Rollo, p. 40).

    Hearings were conducted with complainant’s counsel, Atty. Gaudencio de Lunas, as her lone witness. He testified on the several payments made to respondent for the implementation of the writs of execution. He denied respondent’s claim that the payments were applied to necessary expenses because he personally provided for the transportation and meals of the other personnel on various occasions (TSN, October 18, 1993, pp. 34-36).

    Respondent failed to testify despite several opportunities, and the case was submitted for resolution.

    Pending investigation of the matter, respondent applied for a leave of absence for the period August 2 to October 29, 1993. Thereafter, he failed to return to work and had not been reporting for work since then. On May 18, 1994, he tendered his resignation letter dated January 31, 1994, citing health reasons (Rollo, p. 61).

    II


    We find respondent guilty of dereliction of duty.

    Respondent failed to exert reasonable efforts to fully implement the writs of execution in a simple ejectment case, even after the lapse of two years from the issuance of the original writ. We are not unmindful of the fact that there were partial executions of the judgment, however, the records show that of seventeen tenants to be evicted, respondent was only successful in evicting three of them (TSN, October 18, 1993, p. 28).

    Respondent cannot attribute the delay of the implementation of the writ to the motion to quash the alias writ or the petition for certiorari filed by the defendants with the Court of Appeals. Well-settled is the rule that a decision on a compromise agreement is final and executory (Master Tours and Travel Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 219 SCRA 321 [1993]; Mobil Oil Philippines, Inc. v. Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch VI, 208 SCRA 523 [1992]), and unless otherwise enjoined by a restraining order, the implementation of a writ of execution thereof cannot be prevented (cf. Government Service Insurance System v. Court of Appeals, 218 SCRA 233 [1993]).

    Respondent’s excuse, that complainant and he had an understanding that he would evict only three of the tenants, is self-serving and is contradicted by the fact that he continued to solicit money from complainant for the full execution of the writ.

    A sheriff is primarily responsible for the speedy and efficient implementation of writs of execution to prevent delay and miscarriage of justice. Respondent dismally failed in his duty.

    Respondent failed to account for the monies he got from complainant. A perusal of his statement of account to liquidate the advances, shows that some expenses were exorbitant and were not covered by receipts. He also failed to controvert Atty. de Luna’s testimony regarding the separate advances he made for such expenditures. We reiterate our ruling in Tan v. Herras, 195 SCRA 1 (1991), that a sheriff cannot receive gratuities and voluntary payments from parties he is ordered to assist in the course of his duties.

    We deplore respondent’s lackadaisical deportment from the inception of this case, when he failed to appear and testify in the hearings. The evidence of the complainant therefore remained unrebutted.

    A certification issued by the Branch Clerk of Court of Quezon City attested that respondent had not been reporting for work since October 29, 1993 (Rollo, p. 64). Respondent’s letter of resignation dated January 31, 1994 was received by the Office of the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City only on May 11, 1994. The resignation letter does not alter the fact that he had abandoned his office for failing to report for work or to file the appropriate leave. His absence without official leave, during the investigation of the administrative case against him, is indicative of his guilty in the same way as flight in criminal cases.

    WHEREFORE, respondent is DISMISSED from the service with FORFEITURE of all benefits and with prejudice to his re-employment in any branch or service of the government, including government-owned and controlled corporations.

    This decision is immediately executory.

    SO ORDERED.

    Narvasa, C.J., Feliciano, Padilla, Bidin, Regalado, Davide, Jr ., Romero, Bellosillo, Melo, Quiason, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza and Francisco, JJ., concur.

    Adm. Matter No. P-93-942   April 6, 1995 - JOVITA R. CASAL v. FRANCISCO CONCEPCION, JR.


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED