ANG TEK LIAN VS CA GR.

L-2516 SEPT 25, 1950

FACTS:
In 1946, Ang Tek Lian approached Lee Hua and asked him if he could give
him P4,000.00. He said that he meant to withdraw from the bank but the
bank’s already closed. In exchange, he gave Lee Hua a check which is
“payable to the order of ‘cash’”. The next day, Lee Hua presented the
check for payment but it was dishonored due to insufficiency of funds.
Lee Hua eventually sued Ang Tek Lian. In his defense, Ang Tek Lian
argued that he did not indorse the check to Lee Hua and that when the
latter accepted the check without Ang tek Lian’s indorsement, he had
done so fully aware of the risk he was running thereby.
ISSUE: Whether or not the check issued by Ang Tek Lian that is payable
to the order to “cash” and not have been indorsed by Ang Tek Lian,
making him not guilty for the crime of estafa.
HELD: No. Under the Negotiable Instruments Law (sec. 9 [d]), a check
drawn payable to the order of “cash” is a check payable to bearer hence a
bearer instrument, and the bank may pay it to the person presenting it for
payment without the drawer’s indorsement. Where a check is made
payable to the order of ‘cash’, the word “cash” does not purport to be the
name of any person, and hence the instrument is payable to bearer. The
drawee bank need not obtain any indorsement of the check, but may pay
it to the person presenting it without any indorsement.