Case Digest (G.R. No. 23237)
Facts:
Walter E. Olsen & Co. v. Walter E. Olsen, G.R. No. 23237, November 14, 1925, the Supreme Court En Banc, Villa-Real, J., writing for the Court.The plaintiff-appellee is Walter E. Olsen & Co., a corporation; the defendant-appellant is Walter E. Olsen, who served as the corporation’s president, treasurer and general manager. Olsen was sued by the corporation for P66,207.62, and the trial court issued a writ of preliminary attachment against property belonging to him. Olsen filed a motion to annul the writ; the trial court denied that motion. The trial court ultimately rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for P66,207.62 with legal interest from February 1, 1923, and costs, and dismissed Olsen’s cross-complaint and counterclaim.
On appeal Olsen assigned four errors: (1) the trial court erred in holding that he contracted the debt fraudulently; (2) the trial court erred in refusing to set aside the writ of preliminary attachment; (3) the trial court erred in not absolving him from the complaint and in failing to enter judgment on his counterclaim after deducting the debt; and (4) the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial. The Court of First Instance of Manila entered the judgment described above; the appeal to the Supreme Court was a direct appeal from that final judgment under the ordinary appellate route.
The evidence at trial showed that Olsen, exercising near-exclusive control of the corporation’s funds until about August 1921, withdrew corporate monies without board authorization totaling P66,207.62. Of that amount, P19,000 was invested in the purchase of the house and lot subsequently attached, and about P50,000 was used to buy 500 shares of Prising stock (P100 per share) for himself and a co‑speculator named Marker; shortly thereafter ordinary shares of the corporation were sold at P430 each. Olsen defended by asserting the withdrawals were recorded as his current account with the corporation, that he deposited his own funds and titles into the corporate treasury, and that his debited account was presented and approved at a stockholders’ meeting on February 1, 1919.
The trial court found Olsen’s conduct to be an abuse of trust—a civil fraud—warranting preliminary attachment under the grounds enumerated in section 424 in connection with section 412 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and en...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is an order denying a motion to annul a writ of preliminary attachment reviewable on appeal from the final judgment in the principal case?
- Did the defendant-appellant Walter E. Olsen commit a civil fraud (abuse of confidence) in withdrawing corporate funds so as to justify the preliminary attachment and the corporation’s recovery of P66,207.62?
- Did the trial court err in dismissing Olsen’s counterclaim an...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)