Case Digest (G.R. No. 173780)
Facts:
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company v. Marina B. Custodio, G.R. No. 173780, March 21, 2011, Supreme Court Third Division, Sereno, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company (Metrobank) sued respondent Marina B. Custodio, a teller at Metrobank’s Laoag City branch, for recovery of PhP600,000 allegedly missing from the bank’s vault on 13 June 1995. Metrobank amended and filed a Complaint for sum of money and obtained a writ of preliminary attachment against Custodio’s properties. The trial court granted the complaint and ordered Custodio to pay PhP600,000 plus interest.The trial evidence showed that on 13 June 1995 Custodio worked as Teller No. 3, received loose money (picos) and a cash transfer of PhP200,000 from another teller, and at closing turned over PhP2,113,500 to the cash custodian, Marinel Castro, who signed a Cash Transfer Slip. After closing a shortage of PhP600,000 (PhP200,000 in one-thousand-peso bundles and PhP400,000 in five-hundred-peso bundles) was discovered. Investigations followed: managers instructed searches, some bill wrappers stamped “PEPT-3” (Teller No. 3) were later recovered, Castro admitted signing the Cash Transfer Slip without counting the currency, the security guard testified Custodio left for lunch carrying bags which he did not inspect, and Custodio was allowed to continue working for several days thereafter.
Custodio filed an answer and counterclaim denying liability. She was later accused of attempting to remove a transaction journal (an incident on 23 June 1995) and received a seven-day suspension in a separate administrative action. The trial court found for Metrobank; Custodio appealed. On 14 July 2006 the Court of Appeals (10th Division) reversed and dismissed the complaint. Metrobank sought review under Rule 45, filing a petition within an extension; it...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May a Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari raise and permit the Supreme Court to examine questions of fact?
- Is the separate petition served on respondent by petitioner’s former counsel actionable or controlling on the Court’s consideration of the duly filed petition?
- Did petitioner Metrobank prove by a preponderance of evidence that respondent Custodio was liable for the PhP600,000 cash shortage an...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)