Case Digest (G.R. No. 2508)
Facts:
Francisco Beech v. Felicisima Guzman and Enrique Filamor, G.R. No. 2508, April 19, 1906, the Supreme Court (Willard, J., writing for the Court; Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa, Johnson, and Carson, JJ., concurring).
The plaintiff-assignee was Francisco Beech; the original contractor and assignor was Crisanto Bautista; the defendants-appellants were Felicisima Guzman and her husband Enrique Filamor. A third actor who figures in the dispute as a prospective tenant was W. Morgan Shuster.
On April 19, 1903, Bautista and Guzman executed a written contract under which Bautista agreed to erect a house on Calle Herran, Manila. That original contract was not introduced at trial, and the precise scope of work and original contract price are unclear from the record: Guzman testified the price was 6,000 pesos; Bautista initially testified the written price was 6,000 but later said the true agreed price was 10,000 pesos, which he reduced to 8,000 pesos. Under the original arrangement Guzman paid Bautista 3,000 pesos on April 22, 1903 and another 1,500 pesos on August 7, 1903; Bautista stopped work for lack of further payment, though the date of stoppage is not precisely shown.
On March 24, 1903 (per the record), Shuster contracted separately with Bautista to have the house finished by June 1, 1903, for 1,500 pesos; Shuster paid that sum but testified Bautista had not completed the work by October 31, 1903. On January 7, 1904, Bautista and Guzman executed a new written agreement specifying particular work to be done and obligating Guzman to pay "after the termination of said work the amount of 2,900 pesos, Mexican currency," allocated as 2,000 pesos for completion of the house, the balance of the 8,000 pesos contracted for, and 900 pesos for additional installations (water system, fence, cesspools, blinds, etc.). The work under the January 7, 1904 contract was completed to Guzman's satisfaction. Guzman executed a further instrument on May 6, 1904 acknowledging the January contract and promising to pay the 2,900 pesos within forty-five days; she failed to pay.
Bautista assigned his interests in the contracts to Beech, who sued to recover the 2,900 pesos. At trial the court below rendered judgment for the plaintiff for 900 pesos only. Both parties...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the defendant Guzman bound by the January 7, 1904 contract and its May 6, 1904 ratification so as to be liable for the 2,900 pesos?
- Did the payment by Shuster or any other fact relieve Guzman of liability under the January 7, 1904 contract (i.e., was the January agreement duplic...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)