This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2003-12-10 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| Generally, the execution upon a final judgment is a matter of right on the part of the prevailing party. It is the ministerial and mandatory duty of the trial court to enforce its own judgment once it becomes final and executory. It may happen, however, that new facts and circumstances may develop or occur after a judgment had been rendered and while an appeal therefrom is pending; or new matters had developed after the appeal has been dismissed and the appealed judgment had become final and executory, which the parties were not aware of and could not have been aware of prior to or during the trial or during the appeal, as they were not yet in existence at that time. In the first situation, any attempt to frustrate or put off the enforcement of an executory decision must fail. Once a judgment has become final and executory, the only remedy left for material attention thereof is that provided for in Rule 38 of the Rules of Court, as amended. There is no other prerequisite mode of thwarting the execution of the judgment on equitable grounds predicated on facts occurring before the finality of judgment.[14] In the second situation, the execution may be stayed, notwithstanding the affirmance of the appealed judgment by this Court.[15] It is required, however, that the supervening facts and circumstances must either have a direct effect upon the matter already litigated and settled or create a substantial change in the rights or relations of the parties therein which would render execution of a final judgment unjust, impossible or inequitable or when it becomes imperative in the interest of justice.[16] The interested party may file a motion to quash a writ of execution issued by the trial court, or ask the court to modify or alter the judgment to harmonize the same with justice and further supervening facts.[17] Evidence may be adduced by the parties on such supervening facts or circumstances.[18] | |||||