AM P 158; (January, 1974) (Digest)
G.R. No. A.M. No. P-158 January 31, 1974
FRANCISCO SYCIP, complainant, vs. NICANOR SALAYSAY, Ex-Oficio Provincial Sheriff of Rizal, and His Deputies, Messrs. ANTONIO MARIÑAS, and AGAPITO RAMOS, respondents.
FACTS
Complainant Francisco Sycip lost an ejectment suit filed by Enrique Huenefeld. A writ of execution was issued. Sycip obtained a temporary restraining order from the Court of First Instance, but this was later dissolved. Upon dissolution, Deputy Sheriff Antonio Mariñas, accompanied by Huenefeld and counsel, immediately enforced the writ on a Saturday afternoon. Mariñas ejected Sycip from the premises, levied on his personal properties, and served a notice of sheriff’s sale. An error was later discovered in the list of levied properties prepared by Mariñas, which was promptly corrected. The administrative complaint charged respondents with undue haste in execution and inaccuracies in the levy. The case against Deputy Agapito Ramos was earlier dismissed upon his motion with Sycip’s conformity.
ISSUE
The primary issues were: (1) whether Ex-Oficio Provincial Sheriff Nicanor Salaysay should be held administratively liable for the acts of his deputy under the principle of command responsibility; and (2) whether Deputy Sheriff Antonio Mariñas should be disciplined for alleged undue haste in enforcing the writ and for an error in the list of levied properties.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the administrative case against both respondents, with an admonition to Mariñas. On the first issue, the Court exonerated Sheriff Salaysay. The doctrine of command responsibility was deemed inapplicable. The record showed Salaysay had no prior knowledge of the ejectment case or the execution; he only learned of the incident five days after the ejectment via a letter from Sycip. Upon receipt, Salaysay immediately required Mariñas to explain before the scheduled auction sale. His prompt investigative action negated any finding of negligence or vicarious liability for his deputy’s acts.
On the second issue, the Court found no merit in the charge of undue haste against Deputy Mariñas. There was no existing law or circular prohibiting the enforcement of a writ of execution in an ejectment case on a Saturday or after regular office hours. The execution was carried out peacefully and orderly following the lifting of the restraining order. Regarding the error in the property list, the Court, sustaining the Investigating Judge’s findings, held it was an honest mistake likely to occur given that the leased premises contained furniture belonging to both parties. Crucially, the error was rectified immediately upon discovery and caused no actual prejudice to Sycip. While the Investigating Judge recommended a 15-day suspension without pay, the Supreme Court considered this too harsh for a promptly corrected, non-prejudicial error. The Court instead deemed a stern admonition for Mariñas to be more careful in the future as sufficient disciplinary action.