G.R. No. L-1257 : October 31, 1903
JOSE ESCALANTE, plaintiff-appellant, vs. VENANCIC FRANZ FRANCISCO, defendant-appellee.

FACTS:
Plaintiff-appellant Jose Escalante filed an action to recover the balance of 900 pesos due on a promissory note for 1,000 pesos executed by defendant-appellee Venancic Franz Francisco. The defendant’s answer was a general denial. The trial court found as facts that the defendant did sign the note, but that it was executed for money lost by the defendant to the plaintiff in a game of monte (a game of chance). Based on these findings, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff did not file a motion for a new trial.

ISSUE:
Whether the findings of fact by the trial courtthat the promissory note was given for money lost in a gambling gamesupport the judgment in favor of the defendant and bar recovery on the note.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. The Court held that, as the plaintiff did not move for a new trial, its review was limited to determining whether the findings of fact supported the judgment, and it could not re-examine the evidence. Applying the doctrine established in Palma vs. Cañizares (1 Phil. Rep., 602), the Court ruled that no recovery can be had on a promissory note given for money won at gambling. Since the trial court found the note was issued for a gambling debt, the law provides no cause of action for its enforcement. The judgment was affirmed, with costs against the appellant.