Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

The facts as found by the Court of Appeals, which we can not review are set forth in its decision

thus:
"Resulting: That the facts apparently are not very muddled, the defendant, Herbosa was and
owns the building No. 612, Int. 3 Sta. Mesa, had given it in lease to Ruben R. Ramirez, and like
this He was the president of the Ramirez Telephone Corporation, the workshop of the
corporation although his central office was in the kscolta, Natividad Building, Exh. D. was
moved to the premises: but having rented unpaid rent, Herbosa filed an eviction lawsuit against
Ramirez in the Municipal Court of Manila on November 10, 1949, and the case was assigned to
the Court of the Herbosa Court could get favorable decision there on October 14, 1950, but on
the eve of the promulgation of the sentence in his favor there was already obtained a writ of
freezing against Ramirez, Exh. A, and the same, served at Bank of America on October 13, 1950,
Exh. 2, read as follows;

'Civil Case No. 10620 E.F. Herbosa, Plaintiff


- versus - GARNISHMENT

Ruben R. Ramirez, Defendant


To: Bank of America
Manila
'Greetings:
You and each of you are hereby notified that, by virtue of an order of
attachment issued by the Court of First Instance of Manila, copy of which is
hereto attached, levy is hereby made (or attachment is hereby levied) upon all
the goods, effects, interests, credits, money, stocks, shares, any interests in
stocks and shares and all debts owing by you to the defendant, Ruben R.
Ramirez, ________ in the above entitled case, and any other personal property
in your possession or under your control, belonging to the said defendant
_________ on this date, to cover the amount of r2,400.00 and specially the. . .
xxx xxx xxx 'Manila, Philippines, October 13. 1950.
'MACARIO M. OFILADA Sheriff of Manila
(Exh 2)

and was answered by the bank the same day as follows:


Dear Sir:
In reply to your Garnishment of October 13, 1950, issued under the above-
mentioned case, we wish to inform you that we do not hold any fund in the
name of the defendant, Ruben R. Ramirez.
Yours very truly, '(Exh. 3);
but the Sheriff reitiro the embargo on October 17, 1950, Exh. B. Notifying Bank of America that
it was seized,
. . . the interest or participation which the defendant Ruben R. Kamirez may or may have
in the deposit of the Ramirez Telephone lnc., with that Bank sufficient to cover the said
amount of P2,400.00 '; Exh. B; Y
The banking institution in response to the Sheriff, dated October 17, 1950, that is the same day,
stated that:
. . . We are holding the amount of P2,400.00 in the name of the Ramirez Telephone Inc.
subject to your further orders. ', Exh. G;

that is to say that I accept the notification of the embargo of the funds of the Ramirez
Telephone; Now, remember that on that date, October 17, 1950, Ramirez Telephone had in
deposit with the Bank of America, the sum of P4,789.53, Exh. 9; so that with the embargo, the
free funds were reduced to the amount of P2,389.53; but the following day, the Ramirez
Telephone withdrew the sum of P1,500.00, thus remaining as the last balance, nothing more
than about P889.00; from this arose the present contest, then, on October 19, 1950, the
Ramirez Telephone through its president, the same defendant, Ruben Ramirez, already
mentioned, having issued on October 19, 1950, another check in the sum of P2,320.00 in favor
of Ray Electronics, in payment of certain equipment sold by the latter, Exhs. 15, 17, L, the check
Exh. No, this check when presented to the Bank of America, was rejected, so the Ramirez
Telephone attorney on October 23, 1950 sent a letter of request to Bank of America, Exh. 14,
stating that his client had suffered 'considerable damage and embarrassment', and warning him
that if he were not given complete satisfaction the following day, he would file the
corresponding demand, 'without further notice,' Exh. 14; This letter was answered by the
banking institution on October 24, 1950, alleging that,
'With reference to your letter dated October 23, 1950, in which you are writing on
behalf of the Ramirez Telephone Corporation, it is suggested that you obtain a release
from the Court on Civil Case No. 10620, Ruben E. Ramirez, defendant.
'This Bank is acting only in accordance with the garnishment and has no interest
whatsoever in the funds held', Exh. fifteen;

but according to his warning, the lawyer of Ramirez Telephone Inc., initiated this action on
October 28, four days later; and the reason for action is that the bank,
' . . You should know that Ruben N. Ramirez the defendant in said Civil Case and whose
property or fund was not deposited in that bank and that the Ramirez Telephone
Corporation is entirely separate and distinct entity regardless of the fact that Ruben R.
Ramirez happens to be its President and General Manager. ' pa

nd alleging that because of this and the next return of his check in favor of Ray Electronics
without paying, he had canceled his order for the necessary equipment in the construction of
his telephone lines in the Bicolana region, so all his operations were They had been paralyzed,
par. 5, id .; the defendant Bank of America, summoned by the defendant, filed an objection
motion, which was denied on December 4, 1950, the bank submitted its answer on December
23, 1950 with counterclaim, and then filed suit against the Sheriff, on August 25 , 1953, and
against Herbosa, on August 16, 1955; and the latter in turn in response, filed against claim or
rather, counterclaim against the same claimant, Ramirez Telephone, and also against Bank of
America, September 10, 1955, and the Lower Court, after the hearing, as already said, I rule in
favor of the plaintiff against Bank of America in the counterclaim against him; . . . "
It was further found by the Court of Appeals: 3

Considering: That the testimony of Estanislao Herbosa to the effect that; although Ruben R.
Ramirez was his tenant at the beginning, but it is that more trade, this had shown that 'the shop
of company was established downstairs', meaning that the Ramirez Telephone Corporation
actually occupied the rented premises, so much so that Ruben R. Ramirez used to pay rent on
checks from the Ramirez Telephone Corporation, and this statement, tn 10 and 11, June 25,
1956, being corroborated not only by the Exh. 12, where Ruben R. Ramirez, on paper with the
Ramirez Telephone, had sent Herbosa's lawyer, check No. C-78900, stating in the letter that.
'In accordance with your agreement yesterday with my attorney, Mr. Jose L. de Leon, I
am sending you here with check No. C-78900 for the amount of P812.60, rentals for the
premises I am occupying at the rate of P161 .00 a mount for the period from February 1,
1949 to June 30, 1949, both dates, inclusive, plus P7.00 for the court costs. Exh. 12:
and this letter, read in relation to the Exh. 3, where it is seen that Ruben R. Ramirez and had
funds deposited in the aforementioned bank, Bank of America, so it is clear that the funds of
the Ramirez Telephone were really, funds that could be provided by its President, Ruben R.
Ramirez, for the payment of the dressers for the dedication to Herbosa, and then, also evident
that the house for the well rented is evident from the house by the rented Ramirez Telephone,
and the other facts were added
Also proven, that 75% of the shares of the company belonged to Ruben Ramirez and his wife
Rizalina P. de Ramirez, Exh E. All these facts can not but justify the conclusion that the embargo
of the funds of the Ramirez Telephone by and under an arrest warrant against Ruben R.
Ramirez, especially considering that the embargo only covered.
'The interest or participation which the defendant Ruben R. Ramirez may or may have in
the deposit of the Ramirez Telephone Inc., in the amount of P2,400.00' Exh. B;
when the amount of P4,857.28, Exh. 9, was an act of justice in favor of the Herbosa creditor and
the truth, if the embargo had not been allowed, this would have been in the same situation as
that poor victim who is vulgarly said, after cuckold, was beaten; . .. "