Acency Case Digest
Acency Case Digest
ISSUE
Whether or not Lyric Film Exchange is liable
RULING
No, it does not constitute either negligence or fraud.
ISSUE
Whether or not Petitioner may redeem the property
RULING
Yes, agency is binding only between the contradicting parties, then only the parties, as well as the third
person who transacts with the parties themselves, may question the validity of the agency or the
violation of the terms and conditions found therein.
ISSUE
Whether or not the mortgage may be foreclosed
RULING
Yes. The torrens titlewas duly registered and a person need not look beyond the title of the property.
But there is a narrower ground on which the defenses of the defendant-appellee must be overruled.
Agustin Nano had possession of Jose Vallejo's title papers. Without those title papers handed over to
Nano with the acquiescence of Vallejo, a fraud could not have been perpetrated.
FACTS
From the 1st day of November, 1895, until the 31st day of October, 1896, the defendant Rickards was
the agent of defendant, Smith, Bell & Co. He received from the Cason, as a deposit, 2,000 pesos. When
he left the employ of the defendant company the 2,000 pesos were, by his orders, delivered to another
agent of Smith, Bell & Co. Smith, Bell and CO received and used the amount.
ISSUE
Whether or not Rickards was authorized by Smith, Bell & Co. to receive deposits.
RULING
Yes. When money is received as a deposit by an agent, and that money is by the agent
turned over to his principal, with notice that it is the money of the depositor, the principal
is bound to deliver it to the depositor, even if his agent was not authorized to receive such
deposits.