ChanRobles Virtual law Library

FIRST DIVISION

Sirs/Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated OCT 10 2005.

Administrative Matter No. RTJ-05-1943 [Formerly Administrative Matter OCA IPI No. 00-1036-RTJ] ( Remigia Sangil Vda. De Dizon, Virginia S. Laxamana and Josefina Laxamana-Monta�er vs. Judge Salvador S. Tensuan and Rommel M. Ignacio, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 146, Makati City .)

For resolution is respondent sheriff's motion for reconsideration of this Court's Decision dated August 9, 2005 finding him guilty of simple neglect of duty and imposing the penalty of suspension for three months with warning that a repetition of the same or similar act will be dealt with more severely.

Respondent sheriff was found careless in the preparation of the writ of execution because he copied the prayer in the plaintiff's motion for execution rather than the decretal portion of the appellate court's decision.

In his motion for reconsideration, respondent sheriff avers that his actuations were not attended by malice or bad faith.

Indeed, there was no evidence that respondent sheriff acted with malice or bad faith in the preparation of the writ. After it was prepared, the same was reviewed and approved by his superiors who failed to notice the discrepancy in the writ. In a number of cases, we have considered the lack of malice or bad faith in mitigating the imposable penalty. ¹

As respondent sheriff submits, he is not well-versed in the preparation of the writ as it is not among his usual functions, which are: 1) the service and/or execution of writs and processes; 2) the preparation and submission of the returns of his proceedings; 3) the keeping of custody of attached goods or properties; 4) the maintenance of record books on writs and all other processes; and 5) the performance of other duties as may be assigned by the judge or the clerk of court.

It appears that it was Judge Salvador S. Tensuan, then Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 146, Makati City, who instructed respondent sheriff to prepare the writ. We also note that this is respondent sheriff's first offense. In several cases, we considered the fact that the respondent is a first time offender in mitigating the penalty. ²

ACCORDINGLY , the instant motion for reconsideration is GRANTED. The Decision dated August 9, 2005 is RECONSIDERED. In lieu of suspension, respondent Sheriff IV Rommel M. Ignacio, Regional Trial Court, Branch 146, Makati City, is hereby ADMONISHED to be more circumspect in his dealings and WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar act will be dealt with more severely.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA ESQUERRA-VIDAL

Clerk of Court