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: e an account of his transactions and to pay to the principal all that he may have received by virtue of the agency, even though what has been received is not owed to the principal FACTS: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Kiene was an insurance agent As such agent there was paid over to him for the account of his employers, the China Mutual Life Insurance Company, the sum of 1,539.20 pesos, Philippine currency, which he failed and refused to turn over to them For his failure and refusal so to do, he was convicted of the crime of estafa in the Court of First Instance of the city Manila in sentenced to be imprisoned for one year and six months in Bilibid, and to pay the costs of the trial The accused offered no evidence on his own behalf He rests his appeal substantially upon the alleged failure of the prosecution to establish the existence of a duty or obligation imposed on the defendant to turn over his principal the funds which he is charged with appropriating to his own use. Counsel for the defendant contends that the trial court erroneously admitted in evidence a certain document purporting to be a contract of agency signed by the defendant. The name of the accused is attached to this document, and one of the witnesses, the district agent of the China Mutual Life Insurance Company, stated that it was the contract of agency it purported to be, but failed to state specifically that the signature attached thereto was the signature of the defendant, though he declared that he knew his signature and had seen him write it on various occasions. It is contented that the execution of the document was not formally established, and the trial court erred in taking into consideration one of its provisions whereby the defendant appears to have expressly obligated himself to deliver to the China Mutual Life Insurance Company the funds collected on its account TC: convicted him without the accessory penalties CA: none ISSUE: WON there was a contract of agency between Kiene and China Mutual Life Insurance Company? HELD: YES 20 RATIO: ● ●...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/11/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online