AM P 19 3988; (August, 2019) (Digest)
G.R. No.: A.M. No. P-19-3988 (Formerly OCA LP.I. No. 17-4692-P)
Date: August 14, 2019
Case Parties: MARILYN MEIM M. VDA. DE ATIENZA, Complainant, vs. PALERMO I. AGUILAR, SHERIFF IV, OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, SAN JOSE, OCCIDENTAL MINDORO, Respondent
FACTS
Complainant Marilyn Meim M. Vda. de Atienza was a private complainant in Criminal Case No. 12655 for reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries and damage to property. The accused, Eleazar Candido, was convicted and ordered to pay damages. A Writ of Execution for the damages was issued on April 29, 2015, and respondent Sheriff Palermo I. Aguilar was given P4,550.00 for implementation expenses on September 1, 2015. Complainant made several follow-ups, but Aguilar stated he could not locate the accused (“hindi ko matiyempo-tiyempuhan si Eleazar eh”). On September 29, 2015, complainant inquired at the courts and found Aguilar had not submitted any implementation report. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) directed Aguilar to comment on the complaint. Aguilar requested extensions, citing illness (COPD, Dilated Cardiomyopathy, Hypertension, Diabetes), and eventually filed his Comment on August 30, 2018. In his defense, Aguilar claimed he served the writ on the accused on September 14, 2015 (as evidenced by the accused’s signature on the writ copy), but implementation was not satisfied because the accused had no permanent address, claimed no money, and any family property could not be presumed owned by the accused. He admitted failing to submit periodic reports, blaming a heavy workload and his sickness, but acknowledged volume of work is not an excuse.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Sheriff Palermo I. Aguilar is administratively liable for his actions and omissions in relation to the implementation of the Writ of Execution and his compliance with directives from the OCA.
RULING
The Court found respondent Palermo I. Aguilar GUILTY of SIMPLE NEGLECT OF DUTY. The Court agreed with the OCA’s findings that Aguilar failed to: (1) immediately and properly implement the Writ of Execution pursuant to Section 9, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court; (2) submit the required periodic reports on the writ’s implementation; and (3) promptly comply with the OCA’s directives to submit his comment. His explanations (illness, workload, accused’s elusiveness) were insufficient. Simple neglect of duty is the failure to give attention to an expected task due to carelessness or indifference. The prescribed penalty is suspension of one month and one day to six months. However, to prevent disruption of public service, the Court imposed a FINE equivalent to his one-month salary in lieu of suspension. He was also STERNLY WARNED that a repetition would be dealt with more severely.