FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 236341. April 23, 2018.]
MICHAEL U. DE GUZMAN, petitioner, vs.LA FUERZA, INC., respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedApril 23, 2018which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 236341 — Michael U. De Guzman vs. La Fuerza, Inc. — The petitioner's motion for an extension of thirty (30) days within which to file a petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period. EATCcI
After a perusal of the records of the case, this Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure of Michael U. De Guzman (petitioner) to sufficiently show any reversible error in the assailed Court of Appeals (CA) Resolutions dated July 3, 2017 1 and December 28, 2017 2 in CA-G.R. SP No. 150409.
At the outset, We must emphasize that the Court's review of the present case is through a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, which generally bars any question pertaining to the factual issues raised. It is well-settled that questions of fact are not reviewable in petitions for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. 3 The question of whether petitioner is liable for the amount of the checks is a question of fact which cannot be entertained in the present case.
Here, the Metropolitan Trial Court, Regional Trial Court and the CA are all in agreement that the petitioner is liable for the amount of the checks. Petitioner admitted that he issued the checks in favor of La Fuerza, Inc. for the rental obligations of Ultra Bykes and Ultra Car Detailing. It is basic that factual findings of the trial court, especially when affirmed by the CA, deserve great weight and respect. These factual findings should not be disturbed on appeal, unless there are facts of weight and substance that were overlooked or misinterpreted and that would materially affect the disposition of the case. 4
We find no cogent reason to deviate from the rulings of the lower courts as to petitioner's civil liability. ISHCcT
Section 29 of the Negotiable Instruments Law provides that:
Sec. 29. Liability of accommodation party. — An accommodation party is one who has signed the instrument as maker, drawer, acceptor, or indorser, without receiving value therefor, and for the purpose of lending his name to some other person. Such a person is liable on the instrument to a holder for value, notwithstanding such holder, at the time of taking the instrument, knew him to be only an accommodation party.
The relation between an accommodation party and the accommodated party is laid down by this Court in Aglibot v. Santia: 5
The relation between an accommodation party and the party accommodated is, in effect, one of principal and surety — the accommodation party being the surety. It is a settled rule that a surety is bound equally and absolutely with the principal and is deemed an original promisor and debtor from the beginning. The liability is immediate and direct. It is not a valid defense that the accommodation party did not receive any valuable consideration when he executed the instrument; nor is it correct to say that the holder for value is not a holder in due course merely because at the time he acquired the instrument, he knew that the indorser was only an accommodation party. 6 (Citations omitted)
Thus, petitioner is liable to pay La Fuerza, Inc. the amount of P3,211,836.61, representing the total amount of the checks. Likewise, a legal interest of six percent (6%) per annum will be imposed on the total amount of the checks counted from the date of judicial demand until fully paid.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. Petitioner Michael U. De Guzman is HELD civilly liable to La Fuerza, Inc., for the payment of P3,211,836.61. Likewise, a legal interest of six percent (6%) per annum will be imposed on the total amount of the checks counted from the date of judicial demand until fully paid.
The petitioner's manifestation submitting the certified true copies of the original of the Regional Trial Court Decision dated February 5, 2016 and marked as Annex "A" thereof is NOTED.
SO ORDERED." Sereno, C.J., on leave.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Penned by Associate Justice Celia C. Librea-Leagogo, concurred in by Associate Justices Amy C. Lazaro-Javier and Pedro B. Corales; rollo, pp. 96-106.
2.Id. at 34-35.
3.Guevarra, et al. v. People of the Philippines, 726 Phil. 183, 192 (2014).
4.Almojuela v. People of the Philippines, 734 Phil. 636, 651 (2014).
5. 700 Phil. 404 (2012).
6.Id. at 417-418.