G.R. No. A.M. No. P-11-2968 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 10-3535-P), November 28, 2019
Solomon Son, Complainant, vs. Rolando C. Leyva, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 74, Antipolo City, Rizal, Respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Solomon Son, Finance and Operations Manager of Baclaran Marketing Corporation (BMC), filed an administrative complaint against respondent Sheriff Rolando C. Leyva for grave misconduct, gross neglect of duty, dishonesty, gross ignorance of the law, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. The complaint arose from the levy and public auction of BMC’s real property (with an assessed value of P33,395,000.00 and market value of P19,890,000.00) to satisfy a money judgment of only P765,159.55 in Civil Case No. 1218-A. The Court of Appeals had reversed the RTC’s dismissal of the complaint against BMC, and the decision became final without BMC’s knowledge due to lack of notice of the appeal. A writ of execution and order for levy were issued. Respondent levied and sold the property at public auction without first demanding cash payment from BMC or proceeding against its personal properties, resulting in an excessive levy. Complainant alleged respondent violated procedural rules: (1) failure to provide written notice of sale at least three days before auction under Section 15(d), Rule 39; (2) failure to leave copies of the order and notice with occupants under Section 9(b), Rule 39 in relation to Section 7(a), Rule 57; and (3) failure to immediately make a return to the court after auction under Section 14, Rule 39, submitting the Sheriff’s Report only nine months later. Respondent defended his actions as ministerial, citing attempts to serve notices to BMC and its counsel, which were returned unserved due to unknown addresses, and argued BMC was at fault for not updating its address. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended re-docketing as a regular administrative matter. After investigation, the Investigating Judge found substantial evidence of respondent’s violations, including failure to make a formal demand, levying real property before personal property, and excessive levy. The OCA recommended a penalty of suspension.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Sheriff Rolando C. Leyva is administratively liable for gross neglect of duty and other charges in the implementation of the writ of execution.

RULING

Yes, respondent is guilty of gross neglect of duty. The Court adopted the OCA’s report and recommendation. Respondent failed to follow mandatory procedures under Section 9, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court for executing money judgments: (1) He did not demand immediate payment from BMC before levy; (2) He levied on real property without first exhausting personal properties, contrary to the rule that personal properties should be levied first if sufficient; and (3) He conducted an excessive levy by selling property worth millions to satisfy a judgment of only P765,159.55, violating the requirement to sell only a sufficient portion. Respondent also failed to properly serve notices under Sections 5, 6, and 7, Rule 13, as mere attempts at postal service without further efforts to locate BMC’s new address (which was allegedly nearby) constituted neglect. His actions demonstrated gross incompetence and neglect of official duties. The Court imposed a penalty of suspension for six months and one day without pay, with a stern warning that repetition would be dealt with more severely. The OCA’s recommendation of a fine in addition to suspension was not adopted, as fines are imposed in lieu of suspension, not as an accessory penalty.