Reformina v. Adriano
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Complainant Adela Reformina filed a verified complaint against Deputy Sheriff Dominador Adriano of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch VIII, for grave abuse of authority. The complaint stemmed from Civil Case No. 85-30855, an ejectment case decided in favor of the plaintiff, Guillermo Uy, Jr., substituted by Adela Reformina. The decision was affirmed in toto by the Regional Trial Court. Procedural History: On October 15, 1985, Judge Gonong issued an order granting a writ of ejectment execution pending appeal. On the same date, a writ of execution was issued, commanding respondent Deputy Sheriff Dominador Adriano to carry out the writ. Also on October 15, 1985, at 4:20 p.m., the defendant, through counsel, filed an urgent motion for reconsideration and to stay execution, scheduled for hearing on October 31, 1985. The Petition: On October 16, 1985, early in the morning, respondent Deputy Sheriff Adriano, assisted by hired helpers and policemen, proceeded to the premises to carry out the writ of execution. This was done without the motion for reconsideration being resolved by Judge Gonong. The respondent sheriff, knowing of the pending motion, enforced the writ by moving out the personal belongings of the occupant, complainant Adela Reformina, without giving her reasonable time to pack. Upon her arrival, she informed the respondent sheriff that her lawyers were securing a restraining order and requested him to stop the eviction process, but he did not heed the request. Later, a representative of the complainant's lawyer requested the respondent sheriff to stop the execution because a restraining order was already issued by the appellate court, but the sheriff still did not oblige. At 3:00 p.m. of the same day, a restraining order from the Intermediate Appellate Court was served on the plaintiff, by which time the respondent sheriff had already turned over possession of the premises to the plaintiff.
Issue(s)
Whether respondent Deputy Sheriff Dominador Adriano is guilty of grave misconduct for the precipitate execution of the writ of ejectment pending a motion for reconsideration and a potential restraining order.
Ruling
The Court resolved to SUSPEND respondent Deputy Sheriff Dominador Adriano from office for a period of six (6) months without pay, effective from the date of receipt of the resolution, for having been found GUILTY of grave misconduct in office.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court ruled that the respondent acted with undue haste and precipitate action in enforcing the writ. Under the Rules of Court, the immediate enforcement of a writ of ejectment execution requires the sheriff to first give the defendant notice of the writ and a demand to comply within a reasonable period, usually three to five days. It is only after this period has expired that the sheriff is authorized to perform the bodily removal of the defendant and their belongings. In this case, the respondent ignored the fact that a motion for reconsideration was pending and that the occupant was actively seeking a restraining order from the Intermediate Appellate Court. By turning over possession to the plaintiff by 3:00 p.m. on the day after the writ was issued, the respondent effectively rendered the pending judicial remedies moot and academic. This conduct demonstrates a total disregard for procedural fairness and the standard of behavior expected of court officers. Consequently, the respondent's actions constitute grave misconduct, warranting a six-month suspension.
Main Doctrine
A deputy sheriff acted with grave misconduct in office by precipitately enforcing a writ of ejectment execution without allowing a reasonable period for compliance and despite knowledge of a pending motion for reconsideration and an impending restraining order from the appellate court.