Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
http://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c98a?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[US v. ROGACIANO R. RIMON](http://lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c98a?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c98a}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. 6940, Aug 16, 1912 ]

US v. ROGACIANO R. RIMON +

DECISION

23 Phil. 13

[ G.R. No. 6940, August 16, 1912 ]

THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. ROGACIANO R. RIMON, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

D E C I S I O N

TRENT, J.:

The defendant, Rogaciano R. Rimon,  was charged with having; violated  section 9 of Act No. 1508, known as the Chattel Mortgage Law.  He was found  guilty as charged and sentenced to pay a fine of seven hundred pesos, to the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment  in case of insolvency, and to the payment of the costs of the cause.  From this judgment the defendant appealed.
 
  On  the tenth day of August,  1910, the  defendant was indebted to one Jose Oliver in the sum of P350. On the same day, to secure payment of this debt, he executed to the said Oliver a chattel mortgage upon piano  No. 20459, mark Chassaigne Freres.   Subsequently, and without the permission of the mortgagee, the defendant removed the piano from the city of Manila, where it was at the time the mortgage was executed, and sent it to Calivo, Province of Capiz, without having  satisfied  the mortgage.  The mortgagee knew nothing of the removal of the piano until he discovered that it was aboard the steamer billed for  Calivo, when it was too late to obtain possession  of the piano  before the sailing of the ship.

Sections 9 and 12 of Act No. 1508 read: 

"Sec. 9. No personal property upon which a chattel mortgage is in force shall be removed from the province in which the same is located at the time of the execution of the mortgage without the written consent of  the  mortgagor and mortgagee, or their executors, administrators, or assigns." 

"SEC. 12. If a mortgagor violates either of the three last preceding sections he shall be fined a sum double the  value of the property so  wrongfully removed from the province, sold, pledged or mortgaged, one half to the use of the party injured and the other half to the use of the Treasury of the Philippine Islands, or he may be  imprisoned for a period not  exceeding  six months,  or punished by  both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court."

The acts complained of clearly  constitute a violation of these two sections.

The judgment  being strictly  in accordance with the taw and the merits of the case, the same is hereby affirmed, with costs against the appellant.

Arellano, C. J.,,Mapa, Johnson,  and  Carson, JJ,  concur.


tags