Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 1 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
_______________
* EN BANC.
166
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 2 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
CASTRO, C.J.:
167
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 3 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
168
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 4 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
_______________
169
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 5 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
______________
2 Now Section 1, Rule 63, and formerly Sec. 1, Rule 14, of the Rules of
Court.
3 Alvarez, et al. v. Commonwealth of the Philippines, 65 Phil. 202, 311-
312.
4 Section 1 of Rule 63 of the Revised Rules of Court provides:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 6 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
170
__________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 7 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
171
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 8 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
„The record here discloses that long before the rendition of the
judgment in favor of relators against the Hanover Fire Insurance
Company the latter had notice of the adverse claim of South to the
proceeds of the policy. No reason is shown why the Insurance
Company did not implead South in the former suit and have the
conflicting claims there determined. The Insurance Company
elected not to do so and that suit proceeded to a final judgment in
favor of relators. The Company thereby became independently
liable to relators. It was then too late for such company to invoke
the remedy of interpleader.‰
_________________
172
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 9 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 10 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
173
„The act providing for the proceeding has nothing to say touching
the right of one, after contesting a claim of one of the claimants to
final judgment unsuccessfully, to involve the successful litigant in
litigation anew by bringing an interpleader action. The question
seems to be one of first impression here, but, in other jurisdictions,
from which the substance of the act was apparently taken, the rule
prevails that the action cannot be resorted to after an unsuccessful
trial against one of the claimants.
„ ÂIt is well settled, both by reasons and authority, that one who
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 11 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
_____________
174
actions touching the same property or demand; but one who, with
knowledge of all the facts, neglects to avail himself of the relief, or
elects to take the chances for success in the actions at law, ought to
submit to the consequences of defeat. To permit an unsuccessful
defendant to compel the successful plaintiffs to interplead, is to
increase instead of to diminish the number of suits; to put upon the
shoulders of others the burden which he asks may be taken from his
own.* * *.Ê
„It is urged, however, that the American Surety Company of New
York was not in position to file an interpleader until it had tested
the claim of relatrix to final judgment, and that, failing to meet
with success, it promptly filed the interpleader. The reason why, it
urges, it was not in such position until then is that had it succeeded
before this court in sustaining its construction of the bond and the
law governing the bond, it would not have been called upon to file
an interpleader, since there would have been sufficient funds in its
hands to have satisfied all lawful claimants. It may be observed,
however, that the surety company was acquainted with all of the
facts, and hence that it simply took its chances of meeting with
success by its own construction of the bond and the law. Having
failed to sustain it, it cannot now force relatrix into litigation anew
with others, involving most likely a repetition of what has been
decided, or force her to accept a pro rata part of a fund, which is far
19
from benefits of the judgment.‰
„The jurisprudence of this state and the common law states is well-
settled that a claimant who has been put to test of a trial by a
surety, and has established his claim, may not be impleaded later
by the surety in an interpleader suit, and compelled to prove his
claim again with other adverse claimants. American Surety
Company of New York v. Brim, 175 La. 959, 144 So. 727; American
Surety Company of New York v. Brim (In Re Lyong Lumber
Company), 176 La. 867, 147 So. 18; Dugas v. N.Y. Casualty Co., 181
La. 322, 159 So. 572; 15 Ruling Case Law, 228; 33 Corpus Juris,
477; 4 PomeroyÊs Equity Jurisprudence (4th Ed.) 3172; 2 Lawrence
on Equity Jurisprudence, 1023; Royal Neighbors of America v.
Lowary (D.C.) 46 F2d 565; Brackett v. Graves, 30 App. Div. 162, 51
N.Y.S. 895; De Zouche v. Garrison, 140 Pa. 430, 21 A. 450, 451;
ManufacturerÊs
________________
19 American Surety Co. of New York v. Brim, 144 So. 727, 729-730.
175
Finance Co. v. W.I. Jones Co. 141 Ga., 519, 81 S.E. 1033; Hancock
Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Lawder, 22 R.I. 416, 84 A. 383.
„There can be no doubt that relatorÊs claim has been finally and
(definitely established, because that matter was passed upon by
three courts in definitive judgments. The only remaining item is the
value of the use of the land during the time that relator occupied it.
The case was remanded solely and only for the purpose, of
determining the amount of that credit. In all other respects the
20
judgment is final.‰
„It is generally held by the cases it is the office of interpleader to
protect a party, not against double liability, but against double
vexation on account of one liability. Gonia v. OÊBrien, 223 Mass. 177,
111 N.E. 787. And so it is said that it is too late for the remedy of
interpleader if the party seeking this relef has contested the claim
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 13 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
_________________
176
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 14 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
Order affirmed.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 15 of 16
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 070 9/4/20, 4:53 PM
177
··o0o··
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001745850ce1946e1f132003600fb002c009e/p/AQS406/?username=Guest Page 16 of 16