GR L 3022; (December, 1906) (Digest)
March 5, 2026GR L 3010; (December, 1906) (Digest)
March 5, 2026G.R. No. L‑3050
Luis Santos v. Silvestre Dilag
December 11, 1906
FACTS
– On 5 Oct 1904 the defendant executed a notarized instrument stating he borrowed ₱6,000 from the plaintiff, promising payment within 40 days and mortgaging a fishery as security.
– At trial the defendant claimed the amount was not a loan but money he had won from the plaintiff in a game of monte.
– Plaintiff’s evidence: his own testimony, and that of Jose Escalante and Felipe Zamora (both denied any gambling with the defendant). Fabian de Castro testified he loaned the plaintiff ₱2,500, which he saw given to the defendant.
– Defendant’s evidence: his own testimony and that of Margarita Dilag, Macario Santa Ana, Pedro Capiral, and Ambrosia Santiago, asserting the money arose from gambling.
– The trial court found the plaintiff’s evidence credible, rejected the defendant’s claim, and entered judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant sought a new trial for alleged insufficiency of evidence and raised a bill of exceptions on the exclusion of prior case records showing Escalante’s alleged gambling.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in affirming the loan agreement and rejecting the defendant’s contention that the ₱6,000 represented gambling winnings, particularly concerning (1) the weight of contradictory witness testimonies and (2) the admissibility of prior case records to impeach Escalante’s credibility.
RULING
– The Supreme Court held the evidence was not plainly and manifestly against the trial court’s finding; the plaintiff’s witnesses were credible, and the defendant’s witnesses directly conflicted with them.
– The alleged error in excluding the prior case record on Escalante was deemed harmless; Escalante’s testimony showed he misunderstood the question, and his admission of betting on horse races did not affect the core issue of the loan.
– Consequently, the Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance, ordering costs against the appellant (defendant).
Disposition: Judgment affirmed; costs of this instance levied on the appellant.