This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-03-31 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| Deceit, to constitute estafa, should be the efficient cause of defraudation. It must have been committed either prior or simultaneous with the defraudation complained of.[34] There must be concomitance: the issuance of a check should be the means to obtain money or property from the payee. Hence, a check issued in payment of a pre-existing obligation does not constitute estafa even if there is no fund in the bank to cover the amount of the check.[35] | |||||