Balibag v. Monica
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Complainant Banco Filipino, through its Assistant Vice President Renato C. Balibag, charged respondent Deputy Sheriff Hermito C. Monica with serious negligence and refusal to perform official duties, allegedly violating Republic Act No. 3019 and Republic Act No. 6713. Banco Filipino was the defendant in an ejectment case, and after losing in the appellate courts, an order was issued for the release of rental deposits and a supersedeas bond. On December 28, 1998, Deputy Sheriff Monica remitted unpaid rentals to the plaintiff and released the excess rental deposits amounting to P630,076.94 to Banco Filipino. Procedural History: On May 28, 1999, Banco Filipino discovered a shortage of P151,470.00 and filed a motion for the withdrawal of the balance of rental deposits. The MeTC granted the motion on July 16, 1999, ordering the Deputy Sheriff to release the balance. However, Deputy Sheriff Monica refused unless his fees were paid. Banco Filipino filed another motion on January 10, 2000, asking for direct payment, and the MeTC ordered the Clerk of Court to release the amount directly. The Clerk of Court informed the bank that the sum had already been withdrawn by Deputy Sheriff Monica. Banco Filipino communicated with the Deputy Sheriff on June 29, 2000, stating that his further intervention was unnecessary as the decision had been satisfied and he had already collected his fees. Deputy Sheriff Monica refused to heed the demand. The Petition: In his Comment, Deputy Sheriff Monica explained that on September 10, 1999, he withdrew the excess balance of P151,470.00 pursuant to the MeTC order. He informed Banco Filipino that he had P136,470.00 (P151,470.00 less P15,000.00 for sheriff's fees and expenses) and offered personal delivery, but was instructed to wait for the bank's lawyer. After four months of waiting, he entrusted the money to the Branch Clerk of Court on July 13, 2000. The Court of Appeals ordered the case docketed as a regular administrative matter, and both parties agreed to submit it for resolution based on the pleadings.
Issue(s)
Whether respondent Deputy Sheriff Hermito C. Monica was guilty of gross misconduct for unreasonably withholding the amount of P151,470.00, the balance of the rental deposits/supersedeas cash bond. Whether the respondent improperly deducted ten percent (10%) sheriff's fees on the said amount.
Ruling
The Court found respondent Hermito C. Monica, Deputy Sheriff, MeTC, Branch 56, Malabon, guilty of gross misconduct. He was ordered to pay a FINE of Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00), with a WARNING that a repetition of another infraction in the future shall be dealt with severely. He was further directed to restitute the amount of P15,000.00 to the complainant.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of gross misconduct for withholding funds: The Court found the respondent guilty as charged. The respondent admitted withdrawing the excess rental deposit on September 10, 1999, but only turned it over on July 13, 2000. His defense that Banco Filipino did not pick up the money was not accepted. The court's order dated July 16, 1999, specifically directed him to "dispose of and/or release the said balance of rental deposits to [herein] defendant." The Court noted that his argument regarding personal delivery versus delivery to the company lawyer was unsupported by evidence. Furthermore, the Court questioned why the respondent took no steps to inquire about the failure to pick up the money and why it took him four months to entrust the money to the Branch Clerk of Court, deeming this suspicious. On the issue of improper deduction of sheriff's fees: The Court ruled that it was improper for the respondent to deduct ten percent (10%) sheriff's fees on the excess rental deposits. He had already collected his fees on the previous withdrawal. The Court clarified that he was not entitled to charge sheriff's fees on this amount because it was not money actually collected by order of the court, execution, attachment, or any other process from which he could legally collect fees under Section 7, Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court. Instead, it constituted the unwithdrawn balance of rental deposits held in trust by the Deputy Sheriff.
Main Doctrine
A Deputy Sheriff found guilty of gross misconduct for unreasonably withholding funds and improperly deducting sheriff's fees is ordered to pay a fine, with a warning against future infractions, and directed to restitute the improperly deducted amount.