PINEDA V. DELA RAMA

121 SCRA 671

FACTS:

Pineda   was   caught   in   a   case   against   the   NARIC   for   his   alleged misappropriation  of  many  cavans  of  palay.    He  hired  Atty.  Dela  Rama  to delay the filing of the complaint against him, on alleged representation of the lawyer that he is a friend of the NARIC administrator.  

Pineda then issued a promissory note in favor of dela Rama to pay for the advances that the lawyer made to the administrator to delay the filing of the  complaint.    Dela  Rama  on  the  other  hand  contended  that  the promissory note was for the loan advanced to Pineda by him.  Dela Rama filed an action against Pineda for the collection of the amount of the note.  
 

HELD:

The  presumption  that  a  negotiable  instrument  was  issued  for  valuable consideration is a rebuttable presumption.  It can be rebutted by proof to the contrary.  
 
In the case at bar, the claims of dela Rama that the promissory note was for  a  loan  advanced  to  Pineda  is  unbelievable.    The  grant  of  a  loan  by  a lawyer to a moneyed client and whom he has known for only 3 months can not be relied on.  Pineda had actually just purchased numerous properties.  It is highly illogical that he  would loan from dela Rama P9500 for 5 days apart.
 
Furthermore,  the  note  was  void  ab  initio  because  the  consideration  given was  to  influence  the  administrator  to  delay  charges  against  Pineda.    The consideration was void for being against law and public policy.