Case Digest: Cobb-Perez vs Lantin, 24 SCR 291(1968)

Cobb-Perez vs Lantin, 24 SCR 291(1968)

Subject: Basic Legal Ethics

FACTS

The case involved a judgment creditor, Ricardo Hermoso, who obtained a final and executory judgment against Damaso Perez for the sum of P10,000. Hermoso then filed a motion for the issuance of a writ of execution against the conjugal assets of Damaso and his wife, Mercedes Ruth Cobb-Perez.

The trial court granted the motion and issued a writ of execution against the conjugal assets. Cobb-Perez filed a motion to quash the writ of execution, arguing that the conjugal assets are not liable for the personal debt of Damaso. The counsels of the petitioner have repeatedly caused the delay of the simple execution of sum of money and have availed themselves of suggested remedies available to them.

ISSUE

Whether or not the counsels of the petitioner have caused delay in the execution of the order by the court.

RULING

No.

Under Canon 12.04 of the Canons of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the execution of a judgment or misuse Court processes.

In this case, from the chronology of antecedent events, the fact becomes inescapable that the Perez spouses, coached by their counsels, had sallied forth on a stratagem of "remedies" projected to foil the lawful execution of a simple money judgment. It is equally obvious that they foreshadowed their own reversals in the "remedies" they ventured to adopt, such that even before, one remedy had been exhausted, they interposed another until the case reached this Court for the second time. 3 Meanwhile, justice was delayed, and more than one member of this Court are persuaded that justice was practically waylaid. Hence, the counsels of the petitioners are guilty of delaying the execution of justice.