SC Adopts Findings of JIB and Penalizes Sheriff for Unjustified Failure to Execute Writ…
November 11, 2022
The Supreme Court has fined a Sheriff in Iloilo for neglect of duty after the Sheriff failed to enforce a writ of possession.
Adopting the recommendation of the Judicial Integrity Board (JIB), the Supreme Court’s Second Division found Cresencio G. Gomez, Jr., Sheriff IV of Branch 57, Regional Trial Court, Guimbal, Iloilo guilty of simple neglect of duty.
On January 3, 2019, a complaint was filed against Gomez by Alex T. Nulada alleging that Gomez failed to deliver to Nulada the possession of a building despite a writ of possession in Nulada’s favor. The writ of possession, issued by the Municipal Trial Court in Miagao, Iloilo (MTC) on February 19, 2018, gave the then occupants, spouses Orlando and Pureza Paulma, 15 days to empty the building.
However, even after the 15-day period had expired, the Paulmas remained in the property, prompting the issuance on June 19, 2018 of another Notice of Writ of Possession and a Last and Final Notice to Vacate, giving the spouses three days to vacate the premises.
Gomez twice tried to enforce the writ, but was unsuccessful in both times, as evidenced by the partial returns of service he submitted to the MTC on June 29, 2018 and August 15, 2018.
On December 6, 2018, the MTC issued another Order declaring that the Writ of Possession still stands. However, by March 2019, when Gomez submitted another return of service, the building was still occupied by the Paulmas. This prompted Nulada to file the complaint against Gomez.
In sustaining the findings of the JIB, the Court underscored the role of sheriffs in the dispensation of justice, being tasked to execute final judgments of the courts.
“If not enforced, such decisions become empty victories of the prevailing parties. As agents of the law, sheriffs are called upon to discharge their duties with due care and utmost diligence because in serving the court’s writs and processes and implementing its orders, they cannot afford to err without affecting the integrity of their office and the efficient administration of justice,” held the Court.
The Court added, “Sheriffs ought to know that they have a sworn responsibility to serve writs of execution with utmost dispatch. When writs are placed in their hands, it is their ministerial duty to proceed with reasonable celerity and promptness to execute them in accordance with their mandate. Unless retained by a court order, they should see to it that the execution of judgments is not unduly delayed.”
In Gomez’s case, the failure to implement the writ of possession on multiple occasions was not justified. The Court also held that it was wrong for Gomez to exercise his own discretion on whether or not to implement the writ, as illustrated when he retreated after the Paulmas showed him a Manifestation with an attached Contract to Sell. “[Gomez’s] exercise of discretion was ultra vires since a sheriff’s role in the execution of judgment is purely ministerial,” ruled the Court.
Thus, for failing to perform his official duty properly and with diligence as mandated by the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel, Gomez was found guilty of simple neglect of duty, defined as a disregard of, or a failure to give proper attention to a task expected of an employee.
The Court, however, modified the recommended fine by the JIB, applying as a mitigating circumstance the fact that this was Gomez’s first offense.
Gomez was thus fined in the amount of P18,000.00, with a stern warning that a repetition of the same offense shall be dealt with more severely by the Court.
FULL TEXT of A.M. No. P-22-054 dated June 20, 2022 at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/30885/