G.R. No. 30427, August 12, 1929
HARRY MARTIN, plaintiff-appellant, vs. AGUSAN COCONUT COMPANY, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

Harry Martin executed a mortgage to Agusan Coconut Company and later entered into a written agreement in November 1920 concerning 203 head of cattle delivered to the company. The agreement stipulated management, reporting, and division of the herd after five years. Martin alleged breaches by the company, including failure to account for sales and missing animals, overcharging for transportation, and failure to provide reports. The company claimed a complete settlement occurred on March 18, 1926, evidenced by Exhibit 1a document signed by Martin acknowledging receipt of 258 cattle and stating the partition terminated their agreement. Martin signed Exhibit 1 but later argued he did so under protest, claiming missing cattle and coercion by the company’s superintendent.

ISSUE

Whether Exhibit 1 constitutes a valid and binding settlement that bars Martin’s claims under the original contract.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of Martin’s complaint. Exhibit 1 is a clear and unambiguous document signed by Martin, acknowledging receipt of cattle and expressly stating it terminated the pasturage agreement. Martin’s claim of signing under protest is unsupported, as Exhibit 1 contains no indication of protest, duress, or coercion. There is no evidence of fraud, mistake, or deception in its execution. By signing and accepting the cattle, Martin effectuated a full and final settlement of all matters arising from the original contract. Thus, his claims are barred, and the principle of res judicata applies.