CASE DIGEST ON MENDOZA V. ALCALA

For more case digests visit http://www.pinaylawyer.com

case digest, case digests, supreme court case digests, supreme court case digest, pinaylawyer.com, www.pinaylawyer.com, case digest, case digest of, case digest on, supreme court case digest, supreme court case digests


CASE DIGEST ON MENDOZA V. ALCALA [2 S 1032 (1961)] - Where the accused in a criminal case for estafa is acquitted on the ground that the prosecution has not proven his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action based on the same transaction may prosper. (1) The conclusion that his guilt has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt is equivalent to one of reasonable doubt. Thus, a civil action may prosper. (2) Under the Rules of Court, the extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of civil unless there is a declaration that fact from which civil is based did not exist. (3) Al¬though no reservation was made, the declaration in the criminal case that the obligation is purely civil amounts to a reservation of the civil action in favor of the offended party. (4) Furthermore, since estafa involves fraud, an independent civil action may prosper under Art. 33 of the Civil Code.

For more case digests visit http://www.pinaylawyer.com

case digest, case digests, supreme court case digests, supreme court case digest, pinaylawyer.com, www.pinaylawyer.com, case digest, case digest of, case digest on, supreme court case digest, supreme court case digests