Can't share this digest on Facebook? Here's why.
G.R. No. L-22320 – 23 SCRA 637 – 133 Phil. 219 – Remedial Law – Civil Procedure – Trial; Judgment – When may a judge quash his own writ of execution
Damaso Perez owe Ricardo Hermoso P17,309.44 representing unpaid purchases of leather materials used in Damaso’s shoe business. Damaso was unable to pay hence Hermoso sued him. Hermoso won hence a writ of execution was issued. Pursuant to said writ of execution, the sheriff issued a notice of sale of Damaso’s 210 shares of stocks in a certain property. Damaso opposed said public sale. Later, his wife, Mercedes Cobb-Perez, filed a motion to quash the writ issued by Judge Lantin on the ground that the shares of stock subject to public sale is conjugal property while her husband’s debt was Damaso’s own personal debt which never redounded to the conjugal property. She initially filed in another court but the same was dismissed because the judge in said court said that it has no power to enjoin a co-equal court. She then filed the motion to quash before Judge Lantin who denied the same.
ISSUE: Whether or not the motion to quash should be granted.
HELD: No. A judge may only quash the wwit of execution he issued when:
(a) it has been improvidently issued, or
(b) it is defective in substance, or
(c) it has been issued against the wrong party, or
(d) the judgment debt has been paid, or
(e) the writ has been issued without authority, or
(f) there has been a change in the situation of the parties which makes such execution inequitable, or
(g) the controversy has never been submitted to the judgment of the court, and therefore no judgment at all has ever been rendered thereon.
None of the above instances were alleged by Cobb-Perez. Her allegation was not even proved as in fact, Damaso, in the Court of Appealas, asserted that said 210 stocks are his own property and they are even under his name alone.
The Supreme Court also observed that there were numerous pleadings filed in order to thwart the execution of the writ which caused this case to be protracted. Said pleadings can be observed to be dilatory hence it ordered the counsels of Damaso and Mercedes to shoulder the costs. See Supreme Court Resolution on this one.
