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
 

   
February-1997 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 99039 February 3, 1997 - FORD PHIL., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100748 February 3, 1997 - JOSE BARITUA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108547 February 3, 1997 - FELICIDAD VDA. DE CABRERA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 112761-65 February 3, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PORFERIO M. PEPITO

  • G.R. No. 114183 February 3, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS BORJA

  • G.R. No. 119310 February 3, 1997 - JULIETA V. ESGUERRA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119935 February 3, 1997 - UNITED SOUTH DOCKHANDLERS, INC. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122156 February 3, 1997 - MANILA PRINCE HOTEL v. GSIS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123332 February 3, 1997 - AUGUSTO GATMAYTAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118915 February 4, 1997 - CAPITOL MEDICAL CENTER-ACE-UFSW v. BIENVENIDO LAGUESMA, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-94-1110 February 6, 1997 - MELENCIO S. SY v. CARMELITA S. MONGCUPA

  • Adm. Matter No. P-96-1203 February 6, 1997 - ERNESTO A. REYES v. NORBERTO R. ANOSA

  • G.R. No. 110668 February 6, 1997 ccc zz

    SMITH, BELL & CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111682 February 6, 1997 - ZENAIDA REYES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117982 February 6, 1997 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118843 February 6, 1997 - ERIKS PTE. LTD. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 118950-54 February 6, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LUCRECIA GABRES

  • G.R. No. 119322 February 6, 1997 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 98252 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENE JANUARIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110391 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOLORES DE LEON

  • G.R. No. 112191 February 7, 1997 - FORTUNE MOTORS (PHILS.) CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 112714-15 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO SAGARAL

  • G.R. No. 117472 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEO ECHEGARAY

  • G.R. No. 119657 February 7, 1997 - UNIMASTERS CONGLOMERATION, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 119772-73 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NIGEL RICHARD GATWARD

  • G.R. No. 125249 February 7, 1997 - JIMMY S. DE CASTRO v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-95-1161 February 10, 1997 - JESUS N. BANDONG v. BELLA R. CHING

  • G.R. No. 108894 February 10, 1997 - TECNOGAS PHIL. MFG. CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109887 February 10, 1997 - CECILIA CARLOS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117702 February 10, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISPIN YPARRAGUIRRE

  • G.R. No. 124553 February 10, 1997 - ROSARIO R. TUASON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-95-1070 February 12, 1997 - MARIA APIAG, ET AL. v. ESMERALDO G. CANTERO

  • Adm. Matter No. P-87-100 February 12, 1997 - FELISA ELIC VDA. DE ABELLERA v. NEMESIO N. DALISAY

  • Adm. Matter No. P-96-1231 February 12, 1997 - ISAIAS P. DICDICAN v. RUSSO FERNAN, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68166 February 12, 1997 - HEIRS OF EMILIANO NAVARRO v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 104666 February 12, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BIENVENIDO OMBROG

  • G.R. No. 115129 February 12, 1997 - IGNACIO BARZAGA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116511 February 12, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. COLOMA TABAG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118025 February 12, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REBECCO SATOR

  • G.R. No. 120769 February 12, 1997 - STANLEY J. FORTICH v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125531 February 12, 1997 - JOVAN LAND v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126013 February 12, 1997 - HEINZRICH THEIS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107554 February 13, 1997 - CEBU INT’L. FINANCE CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108763 February 13, 1997 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112968 February 13, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARSENIO LETIGIO

  • G.R. No. 114144 February 13, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENTINO ABAD

  • G.R. Nos. 114711 & 115889 February 13, 1997 - GARMENTS and TEXTILE EXPORT BOARD v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122728 February 13, 1997 - CASIANO A. ANGCHANGCO v. OMBUDSMAN, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-96-217 February 17, 1997 - MANUEL F. CONCEPCION v. JESUS V. AGANA, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ 97-1369 February 17, 1997 - OCTAVIO DEL CALLAR v. IGNACIO L. SALVADOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 103501-03 & 103507 February 17, 1997 - LUIS A. TABUENA v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119247 February 17, 1997 - CESAR SULIT v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119536 February 17, 1997 - GLORIA S. DELA CRUZ v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121017 February 17, 1997 - OLIVIA B. CAMANAG v. JESUS F. GUERRERO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122165 February 17, 1997 - ALA MODE GARMENTS, INC. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123823 February 17, 1997 - MODESTO G. ESPAÑO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96249 February 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALIPIO QUIAMCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114396 February 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILLIAM ROBERT BURTON

  • G.R. No. 118140 February 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE PIANDIONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121084 February 19, 1997 - TOYOTA MOTOR PHILS. CORP. v. TOYOTA MOTOR PHILS. CORP. LABOR UNION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107916 February 20, 1997 - PERCIVAL MODAY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112288 February 20, 1997 - DELSAN TRANSPORT LINES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-94-1034 February 21, 1997 - LEWELYN S. ESTRELLER v. SOFRONIO MANATAD, JR.

  • G.R. No. 73399 February 21, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAMON ABEDES

  • G.R. No. 117394 February 21, 1997 - HINATUAN MINING CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. SDC-97-2-P February 24, 1997 - SOPHIA ALAWI v. ASHARY M. ALAUYA

  • G.R. No. 110427 February 24, 1997 - CARMEN CAÑIZA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-94-1195 February 26, 1997 - ROMEO NAZARENO, ET AL. v. ENRIQUE M. ALMARIO

  • G.R. No. 94237 February 26, 1997 - BUILDING CARE CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105294 February 26, 1997 - PACITA DAVID-CHAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107671 February 26, 1997 - REMMAN ENTERPRISES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109849 February 26, 1997 - MAXIMINO FUENTES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110098 February 26, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BUENAFE AZUGUE

  • G.R. No. 111538 February 26, 1997 - PARAÑAQUE KINGS ENTERPRISES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116033 February 26, 1997 - ALFREDO L. AZARCON v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123404 February 26, 1997 - AURELIO SUMALPONG v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-97-1368 February 27, 1997 - ERNESTO RIEGO, ET AL. v. EMILIO LEACHON, JR.

  •  





     
     

    Adm. Matter No. P-87-100   February 12, 1997 - FELISA ELIC VDA. DE ABELLERA v. NEMESIO N. DALISAY

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    THIRD DIVISION

    [Adm. Matter No. P-87-100. February 12, 1997.]

    FELISA ELIC VDA. DE ABELLERA, Complainant, v. NEMESIO N. DALISAY, Deputy Sheriff, Regional Trial Court, Branch 9 Balayan, Batangas, Respondent.

    Pedro N . Belmi for complainant.

    Jose F . Caoibes, Jr. for Respondent.


    SYLLABUS


    1. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW; PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; COURT PERSONNEL; SHERIFF; SHERIFF’S FEES; HIGHLY IRREGULAR FOR RESPONDENT SHERIFF TO DEDUCT HIS FEES FROM THE COSTS ALLOWED TO THE PREVAILING PARTY IN THE ABSENCE OF A COURT ORDER. — The Court agrees with the findings of the investigating judge. Section 10(g), Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Court states that lawful fees paid by the prevailing party in entering and docketing the action and for the service of any process are included as costs. Generally, costs are allowed to the prevailing party, unless by order of the court, it is assessed against either party or divided among them (Section 1, Rule 142, Revised Rules of Court). Given these rules, it was highly irregular for respondent to deduct his fees from the award in the absence of any court order to that effect.

    2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; COMPUTATION OF SHERIFF’S FEE UNDER THE RULES OF COURT. — The Rules allow as sheriff’s fee for money collected by order, execution, attachment or any other judicial or extrajudicial process an amount from four (4%) per centum on the first P4,000.00 and two (2%) per centum in excess of P4,000.00 (Section 9(1), Rule 141). As such, the ten (10%) per centum fee demanded by respondent was excessive.

    3. ID.; ID.; ID.; RESPONDENT SHERIFF FAILED TO MEASURE UP TO THE STANDARDS AND DEMANDS OF THE POSITION OF HIS OFFICE; FINE AS PENALTY THEREFOR. — Respondent’s conduct failed, miserably, to measure up to the standards and to the demands of the position of his office. It is well to note that complainant placed her unqualified trust on Respondent. It is extremely disappointing to see such trust betrayed. The Court finds respondent Deputy Sheriff Nemesio Dalisay guilty of dishonesty for which he is hereby ordered to pay a fine of Five Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) and to return to complainant Felisa Elic vda. De Abellera the amount of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00), these to be done within fifteen (15) days from the finality of this decision, otherwise, said sums shall be deducted from his salary at the rate of P5,000.00 per month, beginning with the fine. Respondent is further given the stern warning that similar conduct in the future will be dealt with more severely.


    D E C I S I O N


    MELO, J.:


    The instant administrative case involves accusations of dishonesty and other irregularities leveled against respondent Deputy Sheriff Nemesio Dalisay. It has its origins in the execution of the decision of the Regional Trial Court of the Fourth Judicial Region (Branch IX, Balayan, Batangas) in its Civil Case No. 1546 entitled "Felisa Abellera v. Republic Planters Bank and Manuel Ona."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Plaintiff therein, Felisa Abellera, in her complaint-affidavit alleged that she obtained a judgment in her favor ordering Republic Planters Bank (RPB) to pay the amount of P317,387.40. This judgment became final and executory. On July 13, 1987, she went with respondent to the Balayan branch of RPB to collect the award. Respondent talked to the bank manager, Rufino Pamaran (Rollo, pp. 1-2). Two RPB Manager’s Checks were issued: Check No. 545747 for P30,000.00 payable to Nemesio Dalisay, and Check No. 545748 for P285,648.66 payable to Felisa Elic vda. de Abellera. The balance of P1,738.74 was given as a discount as agreed upon by the bank and respondent (Report and Recommendation, p. 3; Rollo, p. 102). Respondent Deputy Sheriff explained to complainant that the P30,000.00 answers for his 10% sheriff’s fees as agreed upon with her counsel, Atty. Pedro Belmi. Not knowing any better, complainant was prevailed upon by respondent to sign the necessary receipts. When she talked to her lawyer, he denied any such agreement and protested that aside from being excessive, the amount should not be charged against her as she was the prevailing party. Complainant also alleged that she learned that respondent received another P30,000.00 from RPB. Thus, Abellera, through her counsel, filed before this Court a complaint-affidavit dated July 20, 1987 charging respondent with dishonesty and other irregularities (Rollo, pp. 1-2).

    The Court, per a Resolution dated September 21, 1987, ordered respondent to file his comment within ten days from notice (Ibid., p. 4). After several extensions, respondent finally filed his unverified letter-comment, personally, which the Court received on February 15, 1988 (Ibid., pp. 5-14). In said letter-comment, respondent denied all accusations made by the complainant. He also stated that his execution of the decision in Civil Case No. 1546 was proper and regular and that the receipts, duly signed by complainant and annexed to his letter-comment prove his innocence (Ibid., pp. 17-18).

    In her Reply, complainant reiterated her charges (Ibid., pp. 27-29). Thereafter, the Court, through a Resolution dated March 21, 1988 referred the case to Acting Executive Judge Ernesto H. Gorospe of the Regional Trial Court of the Fourth Judicial Region (Branch IX, Balayan, Batangas) for investigation, report, and recommendation (Ibid., p. 38). At the hearing, respondent did not present any evidence in his defense (Report and Recommendation, p. 3; Rollo, p. 102).

    The investigating judge submitted his Report and Recommendation dated September 20, 1996. Finding that it was highly irregular for respondent to charge the prevailing party his sheriff’s fees, the same being in the nature of costs of litigation, Judge Gorospe found respondent guilty of dishonesty and recommended that a fine be imposed on respondent, this being his first offense, and that he also return the P30,000.00 to the complainant (Ibid., p. 4; p. 103). No finding was made regarding the other P30,000.00 which complainant alleged respondent also received from RPB.

    The Court agrees with the findings of the investigating judge. Section 10(g), Rule 142 of the Revised Rules of Court states that lawful fees paid by the prevailing party in entering and docketing the action and for the service of any process are included as costs. Generally, costs are allowed to the prevailing party, unless by order of the court, it is assessed against either party or divided among them (Section 1, Rule 142, Revised Rules of Court). Given these rules, it was highly irregular for respondent to deduct his fees from the award in the absence of any court order to that effect.

    Even granting that the fees were assessable against complainant, the amount demanded was clearly excessive. The Rules allow as sheriff’s fee for money collected by order, execution, attachment or any other judicial or extrajudicial process, an amount from four (4%) per centum on the first P4,000.00 and two (2%) per centum in excess of P4,000.00 (Section 9(1), Rule 141). As such, the ten (10%) per centum fee demanded by respondent was excessive.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary:red

    At the grassroots of our judicial machinery, sheriffs and deputy sheriffs are indispensably in close contact with the litigants, hence, their conduct should be geared towards maintaining the prestige and integrity of the court, for the image of a court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the men and women who work thereat, from the judge to the least and lowest of its personnel; hence, it becomes the imperative sacred duty of each and everyone in the court to maintain its good name and standing as a temple of justice. . . (Punzalan-Santos v. Arquiza, 244 SCRA 527, 535 [1995]).

    Respondent’s conduct failed, miserably, to measure up to these standards and to the demands of the position of his office. It is well to note that complainant placed her unqualified trust on Respondent. It is extremely disappointing to see such trust betrayed.

    WHEREFORE, the Court finds respondent Deputy Sheriff Nemesio Dalisay guilty of dishonesty for which he is hereby ordered to pay a fine of Five Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) and to return to complainant Felisa Elic vda. De Abellera the amount of Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00), these to be done within fifteen (15) days from the finality of this decision, otherwise, said sums shall be deducted from his salary at the rate of P5,000.00 per month, beginning with the fine. Respondent is further given the stern warning that similar conduct in the future will be dealt with more severely.

    SO ORDERED.

    Narvasa, C.J., Davide, Jr., Francisco and Panganiban, JJ., concur.

    Adm. Matter No. P-87-100   February 12, 1997 - FELISA ELIC VDA. DE ABELLERA v. NEMESIO N. DALISAY


    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