RSS

Maulini v. Serrano [G.R. No. L-8844. December 16, 1914]

30 Jul

FACTS

The note was indorsed on the back as follows:

“Pay note to the order of Don Fernando Maulini, value received. Manila, June 5, 1912. (Sgd.) A.G. Serrano.”

 

ISSUE

Whether or not appellant is an accommodation indorser with regard to plaintiff-appellee Maulini.

 

RULING

NO. Appellant is not an accommodation indorser in this case. The accommodation to which reference is made in the Section 29 of Negotiable Instruments Law is not one to the person who takes the note — that is, the payee or indorsee, but one to the maker or indorser of the note. It may be true that in the case at bar it was an accommodation to the plaintiff, in a popular sense, to have the defendant indorse the note; but it was not the accommodation described in the law, but, rather, a mere favor to him and one which in no way bound Serrano.

 

Tags:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: