G.R. No. L-3939 - Mendezona and Co. vs. Moreno

The case involves a verbal commercial contract between the plaintiff, Mendezona & Co., and the defendant, Mariano Moreno, regarding the sale of coprax and hemp.
The plaintiff sought to recover P28,819.53, which was claimed as the balance due for services rendered as a commission agent.
The defendant had shipped hemp to the plaintiff for sale, and the plaintiff had sold various goods on behalf of the defendant over several years.

The defendant alleged damages due to the plaintiff pledging portions of the hemp to secure funds, claiming this affected the sale price.
The defendant also contended that the plaintiff made unauthorized charges for storage, insurance, interest, and repacking.
During the trial, the defendant failed to provide evidence of how the pledge specifically harmed him or the extent of the pledged hemp.

The defendant admitted that all hemp sent to the plaintiff had been sold, but did not substantiate claims regarding the timing or pricing of sales.
The plaintiff was not shown to have acted outside the authority granted by the defendant, nor was there evidence that the defendant suffered any financial loss due to the alleged pledge.
The defendant's claims regarding weight discrepancies and excessive insurance charges were not supported by sufficient evidence.

The defendant initially raised a counterclaim but later abandoned it due to lack of evidence.
The defendant argued that the plaintiff had no legal right to charge interest on the balances owed, citing specific articles from the Code of Commerce and the Civil Code.
The court noted that since the contract was verbal, the plaintiff could not claim interest until a judicial demand for payment was made.