Writ Of Attachment Decision

Summary

In cases involving a writ of attachment, the court examines intent to defraud and pre-existing obligations. If the complainant knew the check was unfunded, it might reduce perceived fraud intent. Issuing a postdated check can indicate intent to pay. For a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65, the higher court reviews if the trial court abused discretion in issuing the writ. Factors include proper issuance, evidence of fraud, and procedural irregularities. The higher court may uphold the decision if no abuse is found. Consulting a local attorney in Cordillera is recommended for detailed advice.

Full Conversation

X filed for a civil action of specific performance and damages with prayer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment. The writ was issued against the defendant, Mr. Robinson, together with the summons. Deputy AA attached and took into custody the properties indicated in the court’s directive which excluded the family home. The entirety of the properties attached was for the satisfaction of P3,*,*.*. The defendant filed a motion to set aside and discharge the writ of preliminary attachment for irregular and improper issuance. This was denied. So, the defendant filed for a Petition for Certiorari under Rule *. Decide on the matter
In deciding on the Petition for Certiorari under Rule *, the higher court will review whether the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the writ of preliminary attachment. The factors considered would include:
- Proper Issuance: Whether the writ was issued following legal procedures and requirements.
- Evidence of Fraud: Reviewing if there was a probable cause for fraud or deceit.
- Irregularities: Any procedural irregularities in issuing the writ.
The higher court may uphold the trial court's decision if no grave abuse of discretion is found. It is advisable to consult a local attorney for a more specific assessment based on the complete details and evidence.