Sheriffs Must Follow Rules in Executing Money Judgments

Sheriffs hold a unique position in the Philippine judicial system. They are the court's implementers, tasked with carrying out its orders and ensuring that judgments are enforced. When a sheriff collects money from a judgment debtor, the law prescribes a specific procedure to protect all parties. A 2010 Supreme Court decision, Peña, Jr. v. Regalado II (A.M. No. P-10-2772), serves as a clear reminder of what happens when a sheriff deviates from that procedure—even with seemingly good intentions.

The Case: A Sheriff's Shortcut

The case began when Domingo Peña, Jr., who was ordered to pay fines and damages in a criminal case, reported Sheriff Achilles Andrew V. Regalado II to the Office of the Court Administrator. Peña claimed that the sheriff collected three separate payments from him—P13,000.00, P4,500.00, and P2,000.00—but issued only handwritten acknowledgment receipts instead of official receipts.

The sheriff admitted receiving the money but said he delivered it directly to the judgment obligee, Flora Francisco, who was elderly and lived adjacent to the complainant. He argued this was practical and spared Francisco the inconvenience of filing a motion to release the funds from the court.

The Problem with the Sheriff's Approach

The Supreme Court found the sheriff's excuse unpersuasive. The Court emphasized that sheriffs must perform their duties "by the book," even when exposed to the hazards that come with implementing judgments. The sheriff's shortcut violated clear procedural rules designed to safeguard public funds and maintain accountability.

The Proper Procedure Under Rule 39

Section 9, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court prescribes exactly how sheriffs must enforce money judgments:

• Immediate payment on demand. The sheriff demands full payment from the judgment obligor.
• Payment to the obligee if present. If the judgment obligee is present, payment is made directly to them under proper receipt.
• Remittance to the clerk of court. If the obligee is not present, the sheriff receives the payment but must turn it over to the clerk of court within the same day. If that is not practicable, the sheriff must deposit the amount in a fiduciary account with the nearest government depository bank.
• No retention or direct delivery. Sheriffs are not permitted to retain collected money beyond the day of payment, nor may they deliver it directly to the judgment obligee.

The Court noted that in this case, the complainant could have paid Francisco directly since she lived nearby. More importantly, since the first payment was handed to the sheriff in his office, he could have easily turned it over to the clerk of court instead of personally delivering it to Francisco.

A Pattern of Misconduct

The Court's ruling was influenced by more than just the procedural violation. Francisco testified that she did not receive the second and third payments on the dates indicated in the receipts. She said she signed those receipts on the sheriff's assurance that he would return with the money—which he did not do until after she filed a complaint and a judge intervened.

The sheriff also admitted he had followed the same irregular procedure for 12 years in other cases assigned to him. The Court found this "incredible" and a blatant disregard for the Rules of Court.

The Ruling

The Court found the sheriff guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, a grave offense under the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases. He was suspended for one year without pay, with a stern warning that repetition of the same offense would be dealt with more severely.

The Court also noted that the sheriff's failure to issue official receipts violated the National Accounting and Auditing Manual, which requires collecting officers to issue an official receipt immediately upon receiving any payment.

Practical Takeaways

• Sheriffs cannot keep collected money. Any amount received from a judgment obligor must be turned over to the clerk of court the same day or deposited in a fiduciary account. Direct delivery to the judgment obligee is not allowed.
• Official receipts are mandatory. Handwritten acknowledgment receipts are not substitutes for official receipts. Collecting officers must issue official receipts immediately.
• Good intentions do not excuse violations. Even if a sheriff acts out of convenience or kindness, deviating from the prescribed procedure is still misconduct.
• Complainants' withdrawal does not end the case. The Court may continue an administrative case even if the complainant loses interest, because the integrity of the judicial system is at stake.
• Patterns matter. A sheriff who admits to years of irregular practices invites severe penalties, as the Court treats such behavior as a deliberate disregard of duty.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.