G.R. No. A.M. No. P-98-1268. August 25, 1998.
Pag-ibig Village Association (represented by its Chairman of the Board), Abner Flor, and Atty. Reni M. Dublin, complainants, vs. Aquilino Angon, Sheriff of the Regional Trial Court, 11th Judicial Region, Davao City, respondent.

FACTS

Complainants charged respondent Sheriff Aquilino Angon with grave misconduct for: (1) hastily, prematurely, and illegally implementing a writ of demolition issued by Branch 8 of the RTC of Davao City in Civil Case No. 23,484-95 (an appealed case); and (2) defaming complainant Atty. Reni Dublin by telling his clients during the demolition that “there is nothing I can do because your lawyer was already paid.” The complaint alleged that during a hearing on January 9, 1996, the parties agreed that any writ of demolition would be enforced only after determining the boundaries of the lots claimed by the plaintiffs, and that defendants would voluntarily vacate if found occupying plaintiffs’ lots. The trial court granted the motion for a writ of demolition on March 18, 1996. Atty. Dublin received a copy on March 29, 1996, and filed a motion for reconsideration on April 12, 1996, set for hearing on April 19, 1996. On April 19, 1996, while Atty. Dublin was arguing his motion in court, respondent implemented the writ. Respondent denied the charges, stating he was assigned to implement the writ via a Memorandum dated April 15, 1996, had no knowledge of the January 9 agreement or the motion for reconsideration, and procured a geodetic engineer to determine boundaries before demolition. He also denied uttering defamatory remarks, supported by affidavits from witnesses. The Supreme Court referred the defamation charge to Judge Romeo P. Marasigan for investigation, who found the evidence insufficient and recommended dismissal. The issue of premature implementation was evaluated based on pleadings.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Sheriff Aquilino Angon is administratively liable for: (1) hastily, prematurely, and illegally implementing a writ of demolition; and (2) defaming Atty. Reni Dublin.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the complaint. On the defamation charge, the Court deferred to Judge Marasigan’s findings, which held the complainants’ evidence weak and insufficient, and credited respondent’s witnesses as straightforward and convincing. On the premature implementation charge, the Court found no misfeasance or malfeasance by respondent. The writ of demolition was issued on March 18, 1996, and Atty. Dublin’s motion for reconsideration filed on April 12, 1996, did not suspend its execution because it was not accompanied by a restraining order. Respondent, assigned on April 15, 1996, implemented the writ on April 19, 1996, after verifying with a geodetic engineer that the constructions were within plaintiffs’ property. The Court noted that sheriffs must execute writs with reasonable celerity absent instructions to the contrary, and complainants failed to prove the demolished structures were outside plaintiffs’ property. The defendants had a history of reentry and defiance of court orders. Thus, respondent committed no administrative violation. The complaint was dismissed.