G.R. No. 32380 , November 29, 1929
DOMINGA CONCEPCION, petitioner, vs. GREGORIO GARCIA, as special Deputy Sheriff, respondent.

FACTS

The Government of the Philippine Islands filed a civil case (No. 35867) against Florencio Reyes to recover the value of misappropriated stamps. An attachment was issued, and respondent Deputy Sheriff Gregorio Garcia levied on household effects allegedly belonging to Reyes. Petitioner Dominga Concepcion, Reyes’ wife, filed a third-party claim asserting ownership over the attached property under Section 442 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The sheriff demanded an indemnity bond from the Government. Before the bond could be filed, Act No. 3531 took effect, amending Sections 442 and 451 of the Code of Civil Procedure to exempt the Insular Government from posting a bond in attachment cases and providing that any damages awarded against the sheriff would be paid by the Insular Treasurer. Relying on this amendment, the sheriff retained possession of the property. Concepcion filed a petition for mandamus to compel the sheriff to surrender the property, arguing that Act No. 3531 was inapplicable or, if applicable, unconstitutional as an ex post facto law.

ISSUE

1. Whether Act No. 3531 , which exempts the Insular Government from posting an indemnity bond in attachment proceedings, is constitutional.
2. Whether the sheriff has a legal duty to surrender the attached property upon a third-party claim without the Government posting a bond.

RULING

1. Act No. 3531 is constitutional. The Court held that the statute is a procedural law dealing exclusively with remedies. It does not violate constitutional prohibitions against ex post facto laws, as such laws pertain only to criminal penalties, not civil proceedings. Procedural statutes may be applied retroactively provided they do not deprive a party of vested rights or impair contractual obligations. Act No. 3531 merely alters the procedure for protecting the sheriff from liability and does not affect substantive rights.
2. The sheriff has no legal duty to surrender the property. Under Section 442 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the sheriff is not obligated to release attached property upon a third-party claim if no bond is filed; the bond requirement is for the sheriff’s protection. Since Act No. 3531 removes the bond requirement for the Government and provides alternative protection for the sheriff, the sheriff acted within his rights in retaining the property. Mandamus does not lie to compel an act where no clear legal duty exists.
The petition was dismissed for lack of merit, with costs against the petitioner.