Title
Escano vs. Ortigas, Jr.
Case
G.R. No. 151953
Decision Date
Jun 29, 2007
Stockholders assumed liability for a defaulted loan; Ortigas paid PDCP and sought reimbursement from Escaño, Silos, and Matti under a 1982 Undertaking. SC ruled joint liability, upheld attorney's fees, and modified interest computation.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 140033)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Loan agreement and initial liabilities
    • On April 28, 1980, Private Development Corporation of the Philippines (PDCP) agreed to lend Falcon Minerals, Inc. (Falcon) US$320,000 under specified terms.
    • On the same day, Falcon officers—Ortigas, George A. Scholey and George T. Scholey—executed an Assumption of Solidary Liability for Falcon’s loan.
  • Guaranties by petitioners and others
    • Salvador P. Escaño executed a personal guaranty for the loan.
    • Mario M. Silos, Ricardo C. Silverio, Carlos L. Inductivo and Joaquin J. Rodriguez likewise executed a joint guaranty on the same indebtedness.
  • Assignment of shares and the 1982 Undertaking
    • In 1982, Falcon shares were assigned by Ortigas, the Scholeys and Inductivo to Escaño, Silos and Matti, part of the consideration being the former’s release from their liabilities.
    • An Undertaking (June 11, 1982) identified Escaño, Silos and Matti as “Sureties” and Ortigas, Inductivo and the Scholeys as “Obligors,” providing that:
      • Obligers must promptly notify sureties of any PDCP demand;
      • Sureties must defend obligors in any PDCP suit;
      • If any obligor “for any reason” pays PDCP, sureties shall reimburse the amount within seven days.
  • Default, foreclosure and PDCP’s deficiency claim
    • Falcon defaulted; PDCP foreclosed on a chattel mortgage, leaving a deficiency of P5,031,004.07.
    • On April 28, 1989, PDCP sued Falcon, Ortigas, Escaño, Silos, Silverio and Inductivo (RTC Makati Civil Case No. 89-5128).
  • Settlements with PDCP
    • December 1993: Escaño compromised, paying P1,000,000 for release of one-third of PDCP’s claim.
    • February 24, 1994: Ortigas compromised, paying P1,300,000 “without admitting liability,” securing PDCP’s release.
    • 1995: Silos compromised, paying P500,000 for waiver of PDCP’s claims against him.
  • Cross-claims, third-party complaint and summary judgment
    • Ortigas filed a cross-claim against Escaño and Silos and a third-party complaint against Silos and Matti under the 1982 Undertaking.
    • RTC granted summary judgment (Oct. 5, 1995), ordering Escaño, Silos and Matti to pay Ortigas jointly and severally P1,300,000 plus P20,000 attorney’s fees.
    • CA affirmed (Jan. 23, 2002), finding no genuine issue of material fact.
    • Escaño and Silos petitioned the Supreme Court, contesting their liability under the Undertaking, the nature of their obligation (joint vs. solidary), interest rate and attorney’s fees.

Issues:

  • Are petitioners obligated to reimburse Ortigas under the 1982 Undertaking?
  • Is their liability to Ortigas joint only or solidary?
  • Are they liable for attorney’s fees?
  • What is the proper interest rate and computation date on the reimbursable sum?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.