Petitioners vs. vs. Respondent Leonardo Abola Baizas, Alberto & Associates
Petitioners vs. vs. Respondent Leonardo Abola Baizas, Alberto & Associates
DECISION
MAKALINTAL , Actg ., C .J : p
"II. The lower court erred in not nding that in any event the respondent
was lawfully excluded from, and deprived of, her alleged share, interest and
participation, as an alleged industrial partner, in the partnership Evangelista & Co.,
and in its profits or net income.
"III. The Court of Appeals erred in a rming in toto the decision of the
trial court whereby respondent was declared an industrial partner of petitioner
partnership, and petitioners were ordered to render an accounting of the business
operation of the partnership from June 7, 1955, and to pay the respondent her
alleged share in the net pro ts of the partnership plus the sum of P2,000.00 as
attorney's fees and the costs of the suit, instead of dismissing respondent's
complaint, with costs, against the respondent."
It is quite obvious that the questions raised in the rst assigned error refer to the
facts as found by the Court of Appeals. The evidence presented by the parties as the
trial in support of their respective positions on the issue of whether or not the
respondent was an industrial partner was thoroughly analyzed by the Court of Appeals
on its decision, to the extent of reproducing verbatim therein the lengthy testimony of
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
the witnesses.
It is not the function of the Supreme Court to analyze or weigh such evidence all
over again, its jurisdiction being limited to reviewing errors of law that might have been
committed by the lower court. It should be observed, in this regard, that the Court of
Appeals did not hold that the Articles of Co-partnership, identi ed in the record as
Exhibit "A", was conclusive evidence that the respondent was an industrial partner of the
said company, but considered it together with other factors, consisting of both
testimonial and documentary evidences, in arriving at the factual conclusion expressed
in the decision.
The ndings of the Court of Appeals on the various points raised in the rst
assignment of error are hereunder reproduced if only to demonstrate that the same
were made after a thorough analysis of the evidence, and hence are beyond this Court's
power of review.
"The aforequoted findings of the lower Court are assailed under Appellants'
rst assigned error, wherein it is pointed out that 'Appellee's documentary
evidence does not conclusively prove that appellee was in fact admitted by
appellants as industrial partner of Evangelista & Co.' and that 'The grounds relied
upon by the lower Court are untenable' (Pages 21 and 26, Appellant's Brief).
"At pages 32-33 of appellants' brief, they also make much of the argument
that 'there is an overriding fact which proves that the parties to the Amended
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
Articles of Partnership, Exhibit 'A', did not contemplate to make the appellee
Estrella Abad Santos, an industrial partner of Evangelista & Co. It is an admitted
fact that since before the execution of the amended articles of partnership, Exhibit
'A', the appellee Estrella Abad Santos has been, and up to the present time still is,
one of the judges of the City Court of Manila, devoting all her time to the
performance of the duties of her public o ce. This fact proves beyond
peradventure that it was never contemplated between the parties, for she could
not lawfully contribute her full time and industry which is the obligation of an
industrial partner pursuant to Art. 1789 of the Civil Code."
'ART. 1299. Any partner shall have the right to a formal account as to
partnership affairs:
We nd no reason in this case to depart from the rule which limits this Court's
appellate jurisdiction to reviewing only errors of law, accepting as conclusive the
factual findings of the lower court upon its own assessment of the evidence.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs.
Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Teehankee, Barredo, Makasiar, Antonio and Esguerra,
JJ., concur.