de Ocampo VS.

Gachalian case

Sept 8 1953 evening: Anita C. Gatchalian was looking for a car for the use of
her husband and the family and Manuel Gonzales who was accompanied by Emil
Fajardo is (personally known to Anita) offered her a car

Manuel Gonzales represented to defendant Anita that he was duly

authorized by Ocampo Clinic, the owner of the car, to look for a buyer
and negotiate for and accomplish the sale, but which facts were not known to
Ocampo

September 9 1953

Anita requested Manuel to bring the car the day following together
with the certificate of registration of the car so that her husband would be able
to see same

Manuel Gonzales told her that unless there is a showing that the party
interested in the purchase is ready he cannot bring the certificate of registration

Anita gave him a check which will be shown to the owner as evidence
of buyer's GF in the intention to purchase, it being for safekeeping only of
Manuel and to be returned

For the hospitalization of the wife of Manuel, he paid the check to

Ocampo clinic

P441.75 - payment of said fees and expenses

P158.25 -given to Manual as balance

Next Day: Manual did not appear so Anita issued a stop payment order
Anita filed with the Office of the City Fiscal of Manila, a complaint for estafa
against Manuel
Appeal Manuel contends that:
the check is not a negotiable instrument, under the facts and
circumstances stated in the stipulation of facts - no delivery (Section 16,
NegotiableInstruments Law) because only for safekeeping (conditional delivery)
Ocampo is not a holder in due course

no negotiation prior to acquiring the check

check is not a personal check of Manuel

could have inquired why a person would use the check of

another to pay his own debt, Gatchalian being personally acquainted with V. R.
de Ocampo