Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2011 > June 2011 Resolutions > [A.M. No. P-11-2897 : June 08, 2011] LOLITA RAYALA-VELASCO V. MA. CONSUELO JOIE A. FAJARDO, SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 93, SAN PEDRO, LAGUNA:

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 08 June 2011 which reads as follows: 

A.M. No. P-11-2897 (Lolita Rayala-Velasco v. Ma. Consuelo Joie A. Fajardo, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 93, San Pedro, Laguna).-

Following the finality of judgment in Civil Case 3069 of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of San Pedro, Laguna (Branch 2), complainant Lolita Rayala-Velasco applied for and was, granted a writ of execution against the judgment debtor. When she got in touch with respondent Ma. Consuelo Joie A. Fajardo, Sheriff IV of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Pedro, Laguna (Branch 93), the latter told her that she would levy on the judgment debtor's Mitsubishi Adventure and auction it off on the morning of February 12, 2009. But this did not take place. After fruitless follow-ups, on April 13, 2009 Velasco wrote Sheriff Fajardo, formally inquiring about the status of the execution. Velasco subsequently met and tried to talk to Sheriff Fajardo but, surprisingly, the latter challenged her to just file an administrative complaint against the sheriff.

Aggrieved, Velasco filed the present administrative case on May 15, 2009 with the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA). In her comment, Sheriff Fajardo said that on receipt of the writ of execution, she immediately issued a notice to pay to the judgment debtor. She added that it was on account of her diligent efforts that Velasco got a partial satisfaction of the judgment. Velasco's counsel wanted her to levy on a Mitsubishi Adventure without first verifying if it belonged to the judgment debtor.

On July 26, 2010 the Court resolved to refer the case to the OCA for evaluation, report, and recommendation. After investigation, the OCA recommended Sheriff Fajardo's suspension for one month and one day with a stern warning against future offenses. On the OCA's recommendation, on January 10, 2011 the Court ordered the re-docketing and reassignment of the case.

The Court has no reason to ignore the OCA's recommendation. The filing of a sheriffs report is not a trivial matter in the administration of justice. It not only apprises the court of the status of the effort to execute the judgment but also shows the party litigants that the sheriff, an officer of the court, is exerting due efforts to ensure that justice is done.

Under Section 14, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, if the judgment cannot be satisfied in full within 30 days after receipt of the writ, the sheriff shall render a report to the court, with copies to the parties, stating the reason for such failure. He shall make such a report every 30 days afterwards until the judgment is satisfied in full. Here, aside from a single Sheriffs Report dated November 25, 2008, Sheriff Fajardo could not show any other document to prove compliance with her duty. Parenthetically, it took her an unreasonable length of time to file her comment without offering any explanation for it, indicating her indifference on the matter.

  The Court thus finds Sheriff Fajardo guilty of simple neglect of duty, which is the failure to give proper attention to a task expected of an employee resulting from either carelessness or indifference.^[1] The Court appreciates in her favor the fact that this is her first offense.

WHEREFORE, the Court SUSPENDS Ma. Consuelo Joie A. Fajardo for one month and one day without pay for simple neglect of duty, with a STERN WARNING that a commission of the same or similar acts in the future will be dealt with more severely.

SO ORDERED.

  Very truly yours,

MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
  Clerk of Court

By:

(Sgd.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZON
Asst. Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

---

^[1] A�onuevo v. Judge Rubio, 479 Phil. 336, 341 (2004).