Practice question
In enforcing a final judgment, a sheriff properly directs a bank to identify and hold the debtor's peso deposit. A bank officer argues that the incidental disclosure required for execution is automatically the forbidden exploratory inquiry in RA 1405. Which response fits Ortega?
- Every disclosure incidental to execution is necessarily unlawful
- The Court treated the limited inquiry and holding necessary for proper garnishment as permissible, rather than making deposits execution-proof
- The officer may seize an unrelated customer's account instead
- A sheriff can dispense with all procedural requirements
- Every banking transaction becomes public
Legal references
- China Banking v Ortega,GR L-34964,January 31 1973,main opinion: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1973/jan1973/gr_34964_1973.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.