Case Summary (G.R. No. 68138)
Background of Events
On April 22, 1975, while managing the Solidbank branch in Baguio City, Go permitted a person using the name Floverto Jazmin to open a savings account, depositing two U.S. treasury checks, which were subsequently discovered to be altered. The real Floverto Jazmin was not linked to these checks and denied any involvement when the Philippine Constabulary began investigating following the bank's report of the fraud.
Allegations and Complaint
On September 24, 1976, Jazmin filed a complaint for damages against Go and the bank, claiming moral and exemplary damages totaling P90,000, plus legal fees. He argued that Go was negligent in allowing the deposit of the checks without verifying the true identity of the depositor. Jazmin contended that this negligence resulted in a baseless complaint against him for estafa, causing him distress and humiliation.
Defendants' Response
The defendants denied Jazmin’s allegations, asserting that they acted in good faith and took necessary steps to verify the identity of the depositor. They filed a counterclaim seeking damages from Jazmin, suggesting he was implicated in the fraudulent activities.
Lower Court’s Decision
The trial court found Go negligent for not exercising due diligence in ensuring the identity of the depositor. It pointed out the discrepancies in the account details that should have alerted Go. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of Jazmin, awarding him moral damages, attorney's fees, and exemplary damages.
Appellate Court Ruling
The Intermediate Appellate Court upheld the lower court’s findings of negligence but disallowed the moral and exemplary damages, offering instead an award of nominal damages. The appellate court clarified that while Go’s actions were negligent, they did not rise to the level that warranted moral damages due to Jazmin's lack of actual loss or economic harm. The court reasoned that nominal damages were appropriate to vindicate Jazmin's legal rights that were violated.
Petitioners’ Arguments on Review
In their petition for review, Go and the bank contested the award of nominal damages, arguing that they had not violated Jazmin's rights since their investigation of the crime was not negligent. They contended that without evidence of negligence on the bank's part, they should not be held liable.
Supreme Court’s Conclusion
The Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court's decision, citing that damages suffered by Jazmin arose from the filing of the complaint and the embarrassment of being investigated as a suspect. The negligence of Go remained central to the instance of harm Jazmin
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 68138)
Case Background
- The case involves a petition for review on certiorari questioning the award of nominal damages and attorney's fees to Floverto Jazmin after his name was fraudulently used by a syndicate to encash U.S. treasury checks at Solidbank.
- Floverto Jazmin, an American citizen and retired U.S. Federal Government employee, resided in the Philippines since 1972 and received annuity checks through the local post office.
- In January 1975, Jazmin experienced delays in receiving his checks, prompting him to complain to the U.S. Civil Service Commission.
- After receiving a substitute check, he encashed it at Prudential Bank, while an impostor using his name opened a savings account at Solidbank with altered treasury checks.
Events Leading to the Complaint
- Agustin Go, the branch manager of Solidbank, allowed an impostor to open a savings account using checks payable to "Floverto Jasmin," showing a discrepancy in the name and address.
- The impostor deposited two U.S. treasury checks totaling P20,565.69 and was allowed to withdraw funds after three weeks without clearance confirmation from the drawee bank.
- Upon the return of the checks with alterations, Go reported the matter to the Philippine Constabulary, leading to Jazmin being summoned for investigation as a suspect.
Legal Proceedings Initiated by Jazmin
- On September 24, 1976, Jazmin filed a complaint against Go and Solidbank for moral and exemplary damages amountin