AgencyDPFebruary32014

in its capacity as agents to recover the difference

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: as equal to one­fifteenth of P1,087.50, that is P72.50. Thus the dividends upon plaintiff Leonor Mendezona's 180 shares would be P13,050, and upon the 72 shares pertaining to Valentina Izaguirre, P5,220; and these sums, added to those collected by the attorney­in­fact Benigno Goitia as part of the 1926 dividends, P90 for Leonor Mendezona, and P36 for Valentina Izaguirre, show that Benigno Goitia thereby received P13,140 in behalf of Leonor Mendezona, and P5,256 in behalf of Valentina Izaguirre. The defendant duly appealed from this judgment to this Supreme Court through the proper bill of exceptions 31 CFI: ordered defendant, as judicial administratix of the estate of deceased Goitia, to pay the plaintiffs Mendezona and Izaguirre the sum of P13,140 and P5,256 respectively, with legal interest from the date of filing of the complaint. CA: nil Issue: 1. 2. Held: ● ● Whether or not deceased Benigno Goitia was an agent of the plaintiffs. YES Whether or not deceased Benigno Goitia (represented by his wife, Encarnacion, administratrix of the estate of Benigno Goitia) owes interest on the sums he has applied to his own use, which he did even after the extinguishment of the agency. YES (main issue under Art. 1896) It further appears that Ruperto Santos assured the court that the dividends for the period from 1915 to 1926 have been distributed among the shareholders, and that the late Benigno Goitia received the dividends due on the shares pertaining to Leonor Mendezona and Valentina Izaguirre, deducting them from the total distribution. In view of these data, the court below reached the conclusion, on the basis of the dividends received by partner Ramon Salinas, that the attorney­in­fact Benigno Goitia received for the plaintiffs­appellees, respectively, the amounts of P13,140 and P5.256, including the dividends for 1926, or P90 for Leonor Mendezona, and P36 for Valentina Izaguirre. As to the interest imposed in the judgment appealed from, it is sufficient to cite artic...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online