G.R. No. 1477 : April 22, 1904
MARIA GONZALEZ, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SIMEON BLAS, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
On June 10, 1903, Maria Gonzalez filed an action in the Court of First Instance of Rizal against Simeon Blas to recover the sum of 500 pesos based on a promissory note (“vale”) dated October 20, 1902, which was signed by Blas. The note was a simple promise to pay 500 pesos without specifying a payee. Blas acknowledged the authenticity of his signature but defended the suit by alleging that Gonzalez was not the person to whom the document was originally delivered and that the original holder had been deceived into parting with the note, which subsequently came into Gonzalez’s possession.

The trial court ruled in favor of Gonzalez, holding that the note was a bearer instrument and that Gonzalez, as the holder, was entitled to demand payment. The court ordered Blas to pay the 500 pesos plus legal interest from the date of demand and the costs of suit. Blas’s motion for a new trial was denied, prompting this appeal.

ISSUE:
Whether the plaintiff-appellee, Maria Gonzalez, as the bearer of the promissory note, has the right to enforce payment against the defendant-appellant, Simeon Blas, the maker.

RULING:
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court. The promissory note in question, being a simple promise to pay a sum of money without specifying a payee, is considered a bearer instrument under the law. As the holder in possession of the note, Gonzalez is presumed to be a lawful holder entitled to enforce the obligation. Blas’s defense that the note was originally delivered to another person who was deceived into parting with it was not substantiated by proof. Consequently, Gonzalez, as the bearer, has the right to demand payment from the maker, Blas. The award of the principal sum plus legal interest from the date of demand was upheld. Costs were taxed against the appellant.