Severino v Severino G.R. No. 34642

Severino v Severino 

[G.R. No. 34642, September 24, 1931] 

STREET, J.

FACTS:

• Melecio Severino upon his death, left considerable properties. To end litigation among heirs, a compromise was effected where defendant Guillermo (son of MS) took over the property of deceased and agreed to pay installment of 100K to plaintiff (wife of MS) payable first in 40K cash upon execution of document in 3 equal installments. Enrique Echauz became guarantor.
• Upon failure to pay the balance, plaintiff filed and action against the defendant and Echauz. Enchauz contends that he received nothing from affixing his signature in the document and the contract lacked the consideration as to him.

ISSUE: WON there is a consideration for the guaranty?

HELD:

• The proof shows that the money claimed in this action has never been paid and is still owing to the plaintiff; and the only defense worth noting in this decision is the assertion on the part of Enrique Echaus that he received nothing for affixing his signature as guarantor to the contract which is the subject of suit and that in effect the contract was lacking in consideration as to him.
• The guarantor or surety is bound by the same consideration that makes the contract effective between the principal parties thereto.
• The compromise and dismissal of a lawsuit is recognized in law as a valuable consideration; and the dismissal of the action which Felicitas Villanueva and Fabiola Severino had instituted against Guillermo Severino was an adequate consideration to support the promise on the part of Guillermo Severino to pay the sum of money stipulated in the contract which is the subject of this action. The promise of the appellant Echaus as guarantor therefore binding.
• It is neither necessary that guarantor or surety should receive any part of the benefit, if such there be accruing to his principal.
• Thus, judgment affirmed.