Case Digest (B.M. No. 1154) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Dan Fue Leung v. Hon. Intermediate Appellate Court and Leung Yiu (251 Phil. 681, January 31, 1989), private respondent Leung Yiu filed Civil Case No. 116725 before the Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch II, seeking 22% of the annual profits of Sun Wah Panciteria from October 1955 onward. The restaurant, located at No. 747 Florentino Torres Street, Sta. Cruz, Manila, was registered as a single proprietorship in petitioner Dan Fue Leung’s name. Leung Yiu testified that he contributed ₱4,000 to the enterprise’s initial capital, supported by a Chinese‐language receipt (Exhibit A) translated into English by an interpreter. Witnesses So Sia and Antonio Ah Heng corroborated the receipt’s execution; a PC Crime Laboratory report (Exhibit J) compared the signatures on Exhibits A and D (another partner’s receipt) to pay‐envelope signatures (Exhibits H‐H-24) and confirmed their authenticity. Respondent also proved that petitioner issued Equitable Banking Corporation Check No. 1338 Case Digest (B.M. No. 1154) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Case Background
- Petitioner Dan Fue Leung sought reversal of IAC decision in AC-G.R. No. CV-00881 affirming CFI Manila Branch II Civil Case No. 116725.
- Private respondent Leung Yiu filed complaint to recover 22% of annual profits of Sun Wah Panciteria since October 1955.
- Establishment and Operation of Sun Wah Panciteria
- Opened October 1955 as single proprietorship registered and licensed solely in petitioner’s name.
- Located at Florentino Torres St., Sta. Cruz, Manila, serving Chinatown clientele.
- Private Respondent’s Evidence of Partnership
- Contribution of ₱4,000 on October 1, 1955 evidenced by Chinese-language receipt (Exhibit A) signed by petitioner and translated by interpreter.
- Signature identification by respondent and corroborating witnesses So Sia and Antonio Ah Heng.
- PC Crime Laboratory comparison (Exhibit J) of receipts (Exhibits A, D) with pay-envelope signatures (Exhibits H, H-1 to H-24) confirmed petitioner’s signature.
- Receipt of ₱12,000 from profits evidenced by Equitable Banking Corporation Check No. 13389470-B (Exhibit B) and bank officer testimonies.
- Petitioner’s Evidence and Denials
- Denied receipt of any ₱4,000 contribution, claiming sole capital of ~₱2,000 from personal savings and salaries.
- Presented government permits showing single proprietorship status.
- Denied issuing Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
- Lower Courts’ Decisions
- Trial court credited plaintiff, ordering payment of 22% of annual profits from October 1955 until fully paid, plus ₱5,000 attorney’s fees and costs.
- Amended decision fixed 22% of net profit of ₱8,000 per day from judicial demand, plus fees and costs.
- IAC modified award in stages (different daily net-profit periods) then ultimately affirmed amended decision: 22% of ₱8,000/day from July 13, 1978 until fully paid, plus ₱5,000 and costs.
- Procedural Delays and Evidentiary Rulings
- Petitioner’s counsel repeatedly postponed hearings and failed to produce sales books despite subpoena duces tecum, resulting in waiver.
- Cashier Mrs. Licup’s unrebuffed testimony established average gross sales: ₱7,000/day regular, ₱10,000/day pay days, plus catering revenues.
- Courts admitted PC Crime Laboratory report and partnership evidence due to petitioner’s failure to object timely.
Issues:
- Whether respondent is a partner in Sun Wah Panciteria despite “financial assistance” terminology.
- Whether the PC Crime Laboratory report and handwriting specimens were properly admitted and probative.
- Whether the action for profits is barred by the ten-year prescription under Articles 1144 and 1155 of the Civil Code.
- Whether the monetary awards based on unproduced books and cashier testimony were excessive or unconscionable.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)