Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 124 views

    Sura V. Martin

    Uploaded by

    TJ Merin
    The defendant, Vicente S. Martin, Sr., was ordered to pay child support of P100 per month for his natural son. When Martin failed to satisfy a writ of execution, the trial court held him in contempt of court and ordered his arrest and imprisonment. However, the Sheriff's return showed that Martin was insolvent and jobless, living with and supported by his widowed mother. The Supreme Court held that (1) ordering Martin's arrest and imprisonment for failing to satisfy the judgment despite his insolvency violated his constitutional right against imprisonment for debt; and (2) Martin's failure to satisfy the judgment did not amount to indirect contempt because the judgment was a final disposition declaring the parties' rights and obligations, and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Sura V. Martin

    Uploaded by

    TJ Merin
    124 views2 pages
    The defendant, Vicente S. Martin, Sr., was ordered to pay child support of P100 per month for his natural son. When Martin failed to satisfy a writ of execution, the trial court held him in contempt of court and ordered his arrest and imprisonment. However, the Sheriff's return showed that Martin was insolvent and jobless, living with and supported by his widowed mother. The Supreme Court held that (1) ordering Martin's arrest and imprisonment for failing to satisfy the judgment despite his insolvency violated his constitutional right against imprisonment for debt; and (2) Martin's failure to satisfy the judgment did not amount to indirect contempt because the judgment was a final disposition declaring the parties' rights and obligations, and

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The defendant, Vicente S. Martin, Sr., was ordered to pay child support of P100 per month for his natural son. When Martin failed to satisfy a writ of execution, the trial court held him in contempt of court and ordered his arrest and imprisonment. However, the Sheriff's return showed that Martin was insolvent and jobless, living with and supported by his widowed mother. The Supreme Court held that (1) ordering Martin's arrest and imprisonment for failing to satisfy the judgment despite his insolvency violated his constitutional right against imprisonment for debt; and (2) Martin's failure to satisfy the judgment did not amount to indirect contempt because the judgment was a final disposition declaring the parties' rights and obligations, and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    124 views2 pages

    Sura V. Martin

    Uploaded by

    TJ Merin
    The defendant, Vicente S. Martin, Sr., was ordered to pay child support of P100 per month for his natural son. When Martin failed to satisfy a writ of execution, the trial court held him in contempt of court and ordered his arrest and imprisonment. However, the Sheriff's return showed that Martin was insolvent and jobless, living with and supported by his widowed mother. The Supreme Court held that (1) ordering Martin's arrest and imprisonment for failing to satisfy the judgment despite his insolvency violated his constitutional right against imprisonment for debt; and (2) Martin's failure to satisfy the judgment did not amount to indirect contempt because the judgment was a final disposition declaring the parties' rights and obligations, and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Sura V Martin

    Facts:
    Vicente S. Martin, Sr. was ordered by the CFI Negros Occidental to recognize his natural son and to
    provide support at P100 per month. Martin appealed to the Court of Appeals but the latter court
    affirmed said decision. A writ of execution was issued but it was returned unsatisfied. The Sheriff's
    return of service stated: "The judgment debtor is jobless, and is residing in the dwelling house and in
    the company of his widowed mother, at Tanjay, this province. Debtor has no leviable property; he is
    even supported by his mother. Hereto attached is the certificate of insolvency issued by the Municipal
    Treasurer of Tanjay, Negros Oriental, where debtor legally resides." For failure to satisfy the writ of
    execution, plaintiff's counsel prayed that defendant be adjudged guilty of contempt of court. The trial
    court granted the prayer and ordered the arrest and imprisonment of Martin.

    Issue:

    1. Whether or not the orders of arrest and imprisonment of Martin for contempt of court for failure to
    satisfy the decision requiring him to support his natural son due to insolvency were violative of his
    constitutional right against imprisonmentfor debt.

    2. Whether or not Martin's failure to satisfy the judgment amounts to disobedience to be


    considered indirect contempt.

    Held:
    1. The sheriff's return shows that the judgment debtor was insolvent. Hence, the orders for his arrest
    and imprisonmentfor failure to satisfy the judgment in effect, authorized his imprisonment for debt in
    violation of the Constitution.

    2. The orders for the arrest and imprisonment of defendant for contempt for failure to satisfy a
    judgment to pay past and future support are illegal because such judgment is a final disposition of the
    case and is declaratory of the rights or obligations of the parties. Under Section 3(b), Rule 71 of the
    Rules of Court, the disobedience to a judgment considered as indirect contempt refers to a special
    judgment which is defined in Section 9, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, as that which requires the
    performance of any other act than the payment of money, or sale or delivery of real or personal
    property which must be enforced by proper contempt proceedings.

    Morever, the writ of execution issued on the judgment required "the sheriff or other proper officer" to
    whom it was directed to satisfy the amount out of all property, real and personal, of the
    judgment debtor. The writ of execution was, therefore, a direct order to the sheriffor other proper officer
    to whom it was directed, and not an order to the judgment debtor. In view thereof, the
    judgment debtor could not, in the very nature of things, have committed disobedience to the
    writ. (Sura vs. Martin, G.R. No. L-25091, November 29, 1968)

    You might also like