Scribd
Upload
291 views1 page

Nepomuceno Vs Heredia Digest

The defendant was the business adviser of the plaintiff Marciana Canon. Another plaintiff, Felisa Nepomuceno, was owed 500 pesos by someone and proposed using that debt and additional funds towards purchasing land. Knowing the defendant held funds belonging to Marciana Canon, Felisa proposed they jointly invest in the land. A deed was executed allowing the plaintiffs to repurchase the land within a year and obligating the defendant to make monthly payments yielding 17% annual interest. The court held that the defendant acted as an agent for the plaintiffs throughout the transaction, purchasing the land with their full knowledge and consent. There was no evidence the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care as the plaintiffs' agent.

Uploaded by

Owen Buenaventura
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
291 views1 page

Nepomuceno Vs Heredia Digest

The defendant was the business adviser of the plaintiff Marciana Canon. Another plaintiff, Felisa Nepomuceno, was owed 500 pesos by someone and proposed using that debt and additional funds towards purchasing land. Knowing the defendant held funds belonging to Marciana Canon, Felisa proposed they jointly invest in the land. A deed was executed allowing the plaintiffs to repurchase the land within a year and obligating the defendant to make monthly payments yielding 17% annual interest. The court held that the defendant acted as an agent for the plaintiffs throughout the transaction, purchasing the land with their full knowledge and consent. There was no evidence the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care as the plaintiffs' agent.

Uploaded by

Owen Buenaventura
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

the defendant is the business adviser of the plaintiff, Marciana Canon and about the same time, Felisa

Nepomuceno, the other plaintiff, had an unsecured debt due her of 500 pesos from one Marcelo Leao. The
debtor proposed to give her a deed of conditional sale to a certain tract of land in consideration of 2,000 pesos,
she to be credited with 500 pesos on the purchase price and that to advance the balance of 1,500 pesos; that
knowing that the defendant had in his hands that amount of money, the property of her co-plaintiff, Marciana
Canon, she proposed that they make a joint investment in the land. A Deed of Conditional Sale was executed
with a right to repurchase at the end of 1yr and obligating himself to make monthly payments in consideration
of the right to retain the land in possession in sufficient amount to bring 17% interest per annum on
Nepomuceno and Canons investments. ISSUE:
Whether or not the defendant was an agent of the plaintiffs.
HELD:
Yes. the defendant was acting merely as the agent for the plaintiffs throughout the entire transaction; that the
purchase of the land was made not only with their full knowledge and consent, but at their suggestion; and that
after the purchase had been effected, the plaintiffs, with full knowledge of the facts, approved and ratified the
actions of their agent in the premises. There is nothing in the record which would indicate that the defendant
failed to exercise reasonable care and diligence in the performance of his duty as such agent, or that he
undertook to guarantee the vendors title to the land purchased by direction of the plaintiffs
READ FULL DOCUMENT

You might also like