Case Digest (G.R. No. 20732) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In C. W. Rosenstock, as Administrator of the Estate of H. W. Elser v. Edwin Burke (46 Phil. 217, September 26, 1924), Edwin Burke owned the motor yacht *Bronzewing*, mortgaged to the Asia Banking Corporation for ₱100,000. Early in 1922, H. W. Elser negotiated to purchase the vessel with a plan to organize a yacht club and resell it, retaining ₱20,000 as commission. On February 12, 1922, Burke granted Elser a thirty‐day option at ₱120,000. Elser funded ₱6,972.21 in repairs, plus unpaid bills to Cooper Company (₱1,730.84) and a half‐canvas cost (₱832.93), all without charge for yacht use. After a promotional cruise from March 6 to 23, Elser sought a ₱20,000 loan to replace the engine but failed. On March 31, he wrote Burke that he would not pay more than ₱70,000; Burke and Asia Banking’s manager Avery countered with ₱80,000 payable in installments and mortgaged. On April 3, Elser drafted a letter stating he “is in position and is willing to entertain the purchase” at ₱80,000 with Case Digest (G.R. No. 20732) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Vessel
- Edwin Burke, owner of motor yacht “Bronzewing,” acquired in Australia (1920) for resale; vessel subject to Asia Banking Corporation mortgage of ₱100,000.
- H. W. Elser, prospective buyer, plans to form a yacht club, resell vessel at ₱120,000, retain ₱20,000 commission, and pay ₱100,000 to Burke.
- Initial Option and Repairs
- February 12, 1922: Burke grants Elser a 30-day written option to purchase at ₱120,000.
- Elser advances ₱6,972.21 in repairs (plus ₱1,730.84 to Cooper Co. and ₱832.93 crew wages); stipulation: no hire charge for Elser’s use.
- Promotional Voyage
- March 6–23, 1922: Elser conducts pleasure/promotional voyage with business associates.
- After return, Elser proposes new engine costing ₱20,000; negotiates additional loan with Asia Banking manager Avery, who declines.
- Subsequent Correspondence
- March 31: Elser offers ₱70,000; invites Burke to renegotiate with Avery.
- Same day: Burke, after meeting Avery, proposes sale at ₱80,000 payable ₱5,000 monthly (six months) then ₱10,000 monthly, mortgage to secure.
- April 1: Elser declines Burke’s ₱80,000 terms.
- April 3: In face-to-face meeting, Elser diktats and signs letter stating, “I am in position and am willing to entertain the purchase” at ₱80,000, with ₱10,000 initial payment (60 days), ₱5,000 monthly balance, 9% interest, and ₱80,000 in J.K. Pickering Co. stock as collateral; Burke and Avery endorse “Proposition Accepted.”
- April 5: Elser rescinds and returns yacht, citing inability to fund engine replacement.
- April 8: Burke demands performance under April 3 agreement.
- Litigation and Appeals
- Elser sues Burke for ₱6,139.28 repair costs; Burke defends, counterclaims ₱832.93, and cross-claims specific performance (₱80,000 purchase plus ₱10,000 damages).
- Cooper Company intervenes for ₱1,730.84.
- Trial court awards Elser repairs cost, orders purchase per April 3 terms, and awards Cooper Company its claim; both parties appeal.
Issues:
- Whether Elser’s April 3, 1922 letter constituted a definite, binding offer to purchase the yacht.
- Whether Elser must reimburse Burke and intervenor Cooper Company for repair costs advanced during yacht use.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)