Case Summary (G.R. No. 219774)
Chronology of Events on June 13, 1995
Respondent Custodio reported for work at 8:18 a.m. and received loose money or "picos" for daily transactions. She was assigned as Teller No. 3. Throughout the banking day, she conducted cash transactions with customers. A cash transfer of PhP200,000 was made to her from another teller at 12:10 p.m., a practice ostensibly to cover cash withdrawals. However, evidence showed she had sufficient cash prior to the transfer, rendering the move unnecessary. Custodio took her lunch break alone at 12:25 p.m., returning at 1:12 p.m., carrying a shoulder bag and a paper bag, which the security guard, Hannibal Jara, noted but did not inspect.
At day’s close, Custodio balanced and turned over PhP2,113,500 to Cash Custodian Marinel Castro, who signed a Cash Transfer Slip acknowledging receipt. Shortly after 5:00 p.m., a cash shortage totaling PhP600,000 was discovered. The bank manager, Adriano Lucas, ordered a review of all transactions and instructed searches on employees’ desks, personal bags, and anyone exiting the premises, but no missing money was found.
Investigations and Initial Reactions
Following discovery of the shortage, Metrobank investigators and the Department of Internal Affairs conducted one-on-one interviews with employees, including Custodio. Cash custodian Castro admitted signing the cash transfer slip without counting the money. The other employees, excluding a pregnant Custodio, underwent polygraph tests. Custodio continued working as a teller until June 23, 1995.
Metrobank later recovered eight bill wrappers corresponding to five-hundred-peso bundles allegedly belonging to Custodio by stamped “PEPT-3,” though these wrappers lacked the usual teller’s initials and their discovery was unverified and unexplained. Custodio denied responsibility, contesting the wrappers could have been manipulated or stamped later.
Commencement of Litigation and Preliminary Court Actions
On June 22, 1995, Metrobank filed a complaint for sum of money seeking payment of PhP600,000, attorney’s fees, and costs, along with a motion for preliminary attachment on Custodio’s properties, which the trial court granted. Custodio was served summons the next day, June 23, 1995. Concurrently, she was allegedly caught attempting to remove transaction journals from the teller’s cage; she explained this was due to confusion after being served the complaint and being barred from the teller’s area. The bank manager later recommended her preventive suspension, which was imposed for seven days without pay.
Despite requests, Metrobank failed to produce the signed Cash Transfer Slip during litigation, though its existence and Castro’s signature were admitted.
Trial Court Proceedings
Custodio filed an answer with counterclaim denying liability and attributing the shortage to Cash Custodian Castro, as the shortage was discovered only after the cash was turned over to her. After submission, the trial court ruled in favor of Metrobank, finding Custodio liable for the PhP600,000 shortage plus interest.
Court of Appeals Decision
Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed and set aside the trial court’s decision, dismissing Metrobank’s complaint. The CA emphasized that Metrobank failed to prove by a preponderance of evidence that Custodio was responsible for the shortage. It underscored that the Cash Transfer Slip, signed by Castro upon receipt, was the best evidence that Custodio properly turned over the funds. The negligence of the cash custodian, who signed the slip without counting money, was identified as the root cause of the loss. Additionally, the security guard’s failure to inspect Custodio’s bags during lunch break was considered a serious omission.
Petition for Review on Certiorari Before the Supreme Court
Metrobank filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court within the granted extension period after their former counsel withdrew. Respondent objected to the reception of factual issues in the petition, given that under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, only questions of law are reviewable. However, the Supreme Court acknowledged exceptions allowing factual inquiries when findings of lower courts are conflicting, or when there is grave abuse of discretion, among others. The Court found the conflicting factual findings sufficient to justify a review.
The Court also dismissed issues pertaining to a separate petition filed by the former counsel that was not properly docketed or filed.
Substantive Findings of the Supreme Court
The central legal issue was whether there was a preponderance of evidence proving that Custodio was liable for the PhP600,000 cash shortage. The Supreme Court reiterated the burden of proof on Metrobank in a civil suit to establish liability by a preponderance of evidence, meaning proof more convincing than opposing evidence.
The Court upheld the CA's finding that Metrobank failed to discharge this burden. Critical points included:
Absence of any missing bundles of cash at turnover to Castro, evidenced by the Cash Transfer Slip Castro signed, which constituted the best evidence despite being excluded from records. If a shortage existed then, Castro would have refused to sign or required Custodio’s accountability.
Castro’s admitted negligence in signing the slip without counting the money, which violated banking safeguards designed to prevent losses. This negligence was identified as the proximate cause of the shortage.
The security guard Jara’s failure to conduct an inspection of Custodio’s bags when she left for lunch, despite suspicion, was a grave omission contributing to the bank's inability to detect theft or confirm Custodio's involvement.
The cash transfer of PhP200,000 to Custodio during the day was not shown to be irregular or linked to the shortage because the transfer was properly recorded, and the trial court had stricken the branch manager’s statement regarding its unusual nature.
The eight five-hundred-peso bill wrappers bearing Custodio’s teller number stamp lacked initials and were of dubious credibility due to questionable discovery circumstances and potential for manipulation.
Custodio’s continued work in an accountable position after the shortage was discovered, and the bank’s failure to demand immediate return or accounting of the funds before filing the complaint, suggested lack of firm evidence against her.
Evidence of a prior cash shortage involving Custodio at another branch was deemed insufficient to establish a scheme or habit that could definitiv
...continue reading
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 219774)
Nature and Parties of the Case
- This is a civil case involving a claim by Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company (Metrobank), petitioner, against its teller, Marina B. Custodio, respondent, for the recovery of a cash shortage amounting to Six Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP600,000).
- Metrobank is a banking corporation, and Custodio was employed as a bank teller at Metrobank’s Laoag City branch.
Factual Background and Chronology of Events
- On 13 June 1995, at 8:18 a.m., respondent Custodio reported for work and was assigned as Teller No. 3, receiving loose money ("picos") for the day's transactions.
- Throughout the day, Custodio handled multiple cash transactions with bank customers.
- At 12:10 p.m., a cash transfer of PhP200,000 was made from Teller No. 1 to Custodio, although Metrobank claimed this was unnecessary as Custodio already had sufficient cash to cover the withdrawal.
- Custodio took her lunch break alone from 12:25 p.m. to 1:12 p.m., carrying a shoulder bag and a paper bag; the security guard noted she usually had lunch with another teller but not that day due to a colleague’s absence.
- At close of banking hours, Custodio balanced her cash and turned over PhP2,113,500 to the cash custodian, Ms. Marinel Castro, who signed the Cash Transfer Slip acknowledging receipt.
- Around 5:05 p.m., after all tellers had turned over their cash, a cash shortage of PhP600,000 was discovered – PhP200,000 in one-thousand peso bills and PhP400,000 in five-hundred peso bills.
- The bank manager instructed a review of cash transactions and a search of desks, drawers, personal bags, and instructed guards to search employees leaving the premises, but the missing money was not found.
- Custodio left work at 8:30 p.m. that day along with other employees.
Evidence and Investigation
- Metrobank allegedly recovered eight empty bill wrappers for five-hundred-peso bundles stamped with "PEPT-3" (Teller No. 3), purportedly linked to Custodio, but the wrappers bore no initials and were not presented during the initial shortage discovery.
- Custodio argued the wrappers could have been stamped after-the-fact and were never discussed at the time of the cash shortage.
- Investigators from Metrobank’s regional office and Department of Internal Affairs interviewed employees individually. Custodio was eight months pregnant and exempted from polygraph tests required of other employees.
- Custodio was allowed to continue serving as teller from 14 to 23 June 1995, suggesting the bank did not immediately hold her responsible.
- The Cash Transfer Slip signed by Ms. Castro was not produced during the trial despite requests and declarations that it existed and was signed.
Incident on 23 June 1995
- While performing duties on 23 June 1995, Custodio was served summons and complaint.
- She was caught attempting to take a teller’s copy of the journal print transactions related to that day, which were found in her dress pocket during a search.
- Custodio explained the act was accidental due to confusion after being served with the complaint and being barred from the teller’s cage.
- No cash shortage occurred on 23 June; Custodio was subsequently suspended for seven days without pay for this separate incident.
Trial Court Findings and Judgment
- The trial court ruled in favor of Metrobank, ordering Custodio to pay the cash shortage of PhP600,000 plus interest, findin