GR 47769; (September, 1942) (Digest)
G.R. No. 47769 ; September 11, 1942
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOSE RAMON Y VASQUEZ, ET AL., defendants. OLIVIA VASQUEZ and MIGUEL LIEBONA, appellants.
FACTS
In Civil Case No. 48278 for foreclosure of a mortgage, the Court of First Instance of Manila rendered a judgment ordering defendants Jose Ramon y Vasquez and Olivia Vasquez y Arias to pay various sums to the plaintiff. The mortgaged property was subsequently sold at public auction to the plaintiff for P6,000, leaving a deficiency judgment of P9,742.31 as of April 7, 1940. After failed settlement negotiations, an alias writ of execution was issued, and the provincial sheriff levied upon properties belonging to defendant Olivia Vasquez. She filed a motion alleging her liability under the judgment was merely joint, not solidary, offered to pay one-half of the deficiency, and prayed for the release of her attached properties, depositing P4,871.15 (one-half of the deficiency) in court. The Court of First Instance denied her motion and ordered execution of the entire deficiency judgment against her property. Olivia Vasquez appealed, raising the issue of whether the judgment made her liability joint and several.
ISSUE
Whether or not the judgment sought to be executed makes the defendant Olivia Vasquez liable jointly and severally (solidarily) for the deficiency.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court ruled that the liability of defendant Olivia Vasquez under the judgment is merely joint, not solidary. The dispositive part of the judgment does not state that the defendants are to pay “jointly and severally.” A final judgment supersedes the original contractual obligations, and its dispositive part (fallo) must be construed and followed without reference to extraneous matters. Even if the original mortgage contract (Exhibit A) provided for joint and several liability, the judgment, which became the new obligation, declared it to be merely joint. The remedy for any error or conflict between the judgment and the pleadings or evidence was to seek a correction of the judgment or to appeal seasonably, which was not done. Following the doctrine in Oriental Commercial Co. vs. Abeto and Mabanag (60 Phil. 723), when a judgment does not provide for joint and several liability, none of the defendants may be compelled to satisfy the judgment in full. Accordingly, the appealed order was modified, and Olivia Vasquez is required to pay only one-half of the deficiency judgment. The order was affirmed in this sense, without costs.