Sura vs Martin Case Digest

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 imprisonment for 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 imprisonment for 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 sheriff or 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)