Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ALOMA REYES

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 157943 2013-09-04	PEOPLE v. GILBERT REYES WAGAS BERSAMIN, J.
Nevertheless, an accused, though acquitted of estafa, may still be held civilly liable where the preponderance of the established facts so warrants.[46] Wagas as the admitted drawer of the check was legally liable to pay the amount of it to Ligaray, a holder in due course.[47] Consequently, we pronounce and hold him fully liable to pay the amount of the dishonored check, plus legal interest of 6% per annum from the finality of this decision.
	GR No. 188767 2013-07-24	SPS. ARGOVAN AND FLORIDA GADITANO v. SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION PEREZ, J.
In the crime of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code, deceit and damage are additional and essential elements of the offense. It is the fraud or deceit employed by the accused in issuing a worthless check that is penalized.[17] A prima facie presumption of deceit arises when a check is dishonored for lack or insufficiency of funds.[18] Records show that a notice of dishonor as well as demands for payment, were sent to petitioners. The presumption of deceit applies, and petitioners must overcome this presumption through substantial evidence. These issues may only be threshed out in a criminal investigation which must proceed independently of the civil case.
	GR No. 143959 2008-02-19	PEOPLE v. NORMA BOOC CARPIO, J.
Damage to the payee.[7]
	GR NO. 166873 2007-04-27	GEMMA ILAGAN v. PEOPLE CARPIO MORALES, J.
Deceit and damage are the essential elements of estafa. Deceit to constitute estafa under above-quoted Article 315 2(d) of the Revised Penal Code must be the efficient cause of the defraudation. There must be concomitance: the issuance of the check should be the means to obtain money or property from the payer.[21]
	GR NO. 154721 2007-03-22	ALFONSO FIRAZA v. PEOPLE CARPIO, J.
damage to the payee.[11] All the elements are present in this case. Petitioner issued PNB Check No. 395532-S to obtain the title of the land from private complainant. As found by the Court of Appeals, petitioner issued the check to induce private complainant to execute a deed of sale in his favor. Mediavillo, a defense witness, confirmed that the Deed of Absolute Sale was signed after petitioner gave the checks to private complainant. Thus:Q. And you will agree with the fact that after the issuance and delivery of the check to Mrs. Samar and her subsequent acceptance thereof, the Deed of Sale, as you said, was in turn delivered to Mr. Firaza, did I get you correctly?