GR 154559; (October, 2011) (Digest)
G.R. No. 154559 ; October 5, 2011
THE LAW FIRM OF RAYMUNDO A. ARMOVIT, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and BENGSON COMMERCIAL BUILDING, INC., Respondents.
FACTS
Bengson Commercial Building, Inc. (BCBI) obtained loans from the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) secured by mortgages. Upon BCBI’s default, GSIS extrajudicially foreclosed the properties. With the Armovit Law Firm as counsel, BCBI filed an action to annul the foreclosure (Civil Case No. 2794). The trial court nullified the foreclosure and ordered, among other things, GSIS to restore possession to BCBI and pay accrued rentals. GSIS appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CV No. 09361), which affirmed the trial court’s decision with modifications in a January 19, 1988 Decision. This CA Decision became final and executory on February 10, 1988. During the pendency of the appeal, the Armovit Law Firm was replaced as BCBI’s counsel, a move disputed by the law firm.
Subsequently, the Armovit Law Firm sought to enforce an attorney’s charging lien for its services. The matter of its fees reached the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 90983 . In a September 27, 1991 Decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Armovit Law Firm was entitled to a charging lien equivalent to 20% of the monetary award recovered by BCBI from GSIS. The Court ordered the trial court to determine the specific amount based on the final judgment in the main case (the 1988 CA Decision in CA-G.R. CV No. 09361) and to ensure payment to the law firm.
Thereafter, the Armovit Law Firm filed the present “Petition and/or Motion for Execution” before the Supreme Court. As a petition for certiorari, it assailed subsequent Resolutions of the Court of Appeals (in a related case, CA-G.R. CV No. 43099) and Orders of the Regional Trial Court. As a motion for execution, it sought the execution of the Supreme Court’s 1991 Decision in G.R. No. 90983 regarding its attorney’s fees.
ISSUE
Whether the Supreme Court should grant the petitioner’s Motion for Execution of its 1991 Decision in G.R. No. 90983 , which recognized the Armovit Law Firm’s charging lien.
RULING
The Supreme Court DISMISSED the Petition and denied the Motion for Execution.
The Court held that the execution of its 1991 Decision in G.R. No. 90983 was already a settled matter. The records showed that the trial court had already complied with the Supreme Court’s directive. Specifically, in an Order dated June 7, 1993, the trial court determined the amount due to the Armovit Law Firm based on the final judgment in the main case and ordered BCBI to pay the firm the sum of P1,052,000.00. This Order had become final and executory, as no appeal was taken from it. The Court of Appeals, in its assailed Resolutions, correctly upheld the trial court’s compliance and noted that the attorney’s fees had been fully satisfied, as evidenced by a receipt.
Therefore, the Supreme Court found no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the Court of Appeals. The petitioner’s attempt to relitigate the execution of the 1991 Decision was impermissible, as it sought to vary the terms of a final and executory judgment. The Court emphasized that the 1991 Decision did not specify a lump-sum amount but ordered the trial court to compute the fees based on the final judgment in the main case, which the trial court had done.