This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-09-11 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The raison d' etre behind the requirement of periodic reports under Rule 39, Section 14 of the Rules of Court is to update the court on the status of the execution and to take necessary steps to ensure the speedy execution of decisions.[20] Macusi did not deny that he failed to file periodic reports on the Writ of Execution dated September 10, 2008 in Civil Case No. 429-06, as well as on the writs of execution in the other cases in Judge Dalanao's inventory. In his defense, however, he asserted that the prevailing party in the cases, including Paligan, failed to coordinate or refused to cooperate with him in the implementation of their respective writs of execution; and that the writs of execution were not properly turned over to him when he was appointed Sheriff in April 2005. Macusi's excuses cannot exonerate him. | |||||
|
2012-11-26 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Section 9, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court does not prohibit the respondent sheriffs from garnishing the complainant's bank deposits on the same day that a copy of the writ of execution was served on the judgment obligor. In Torres v. Cabling,[8] we held that a sheriff is not required to give the judgment debtor time to raise cash. The reason for this is to ensure that the available property is not lost.[9] We even disciplined a sheriff who failed to immediately levy on the personal properties of the debtor who refused to pay the amount stated in the writ of execution.[10] | |||||