AgencyDPFebruary32014

The defendant manifested that after a painstaking

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: plus 1,000 J. K. Pickering shares as security. When Lyons returned to the Philippines, he accepted the J. K. Pickering shares and sold them for his own benefit. Also, he told Elser to let the Carriedo mortgage remain. Hence, Elser returned the cancellation of the mortgage on the Carriedo property and took back from Fidelity & Surety Co. the new mortgage on his property, the M. H. del Pilar property, together with the 1,000 J. K. Pickering shares. Upon the death of Elser, Lyons filed an action under the presumption that since part of the money used to obtain the San Juan property was a loan granted upon the mortgage of the Carriedo property, which he co­owns with Elser, he is entitled to a part (shares) of J. K. Pickering & Company. The case for the plaintiff supposes that, when Elser placed a mortgage for P50,000 upon the equity of redemption in the Carriedo property, Lyons, as half owner of said property, became, involuntarily the owner of an undivided interest in the property acquired partly by that money; and in consideration of this fact, he is entitled to the 446 and 2/3 shares of J. K. Pickering & Company, with the earnings thereon. TC: CFI dismissed the complaint. Plaintiff appealed to the SC. ISSUE: W/N Lyons is entitled to his claimed shares of J.K. Pickering and its earnings as Elser’s partner, by virtue of his half ownership of the Carriedo property which was used as security for the loan in the acquisition of the San Juan Estate? SC : NO ­ Affirmed the CFI decision. In the purely legal aspect of the case, the position of the appellant is, in our opinion, untenable. If Elser had used any money actually belonging to Lyons in this deal, he would under article 1724 of the Civil Code and article 264 of the Code of Commerce, be obligated to pay interest upon the money so applied to his own use. Under the law prevailing in this jurisdiction a trust does not ordinarily attach with respect to property acquired by a person who uses money belonging to another (Martin...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online