Anda di halaman 1dari 1

G.R. No.

September 25, 1950
ANG TEK LIAN, petitioner,
THE COURT OF APPEALS, respondent.,
Facts: Knowing he had no funds therefor, petitioner ng !e" #ian drew a chec" upon the $hina %an"ing
$orporation for the sum of &',000, pa(ab)e to the order of *cash+. ,e de)ivered it to #ee ,ua ,ong in
e-change for mone( which the )atter handed in the act. .n the ne-t business da(, the chec" was
presented b( #ee ,ua ,ong to the drawee ban" for pa(ment, but it was dishonored for insufficienc( of
funds. %ecause of this, a comp)aint for estafa was fi)ed. /t was argued, however, that as the chec" had
been made pa(ab)e to *cash+ and had not been endorsed b( petitioner ng !e" #ian, the defendant is not
gui)t( of the offense charged.
/ssue: 0hether or not petitioner ng !e" #ian is )iab)e for estafa even though he did not endorse the
chec" which is pa(ab)e to *cash+.
,e)d: 1es, he is sti)) )iab)e. chec" pa(ab)e to the order of cash is a bearer instrument. 0here a chec" is
made pa(ab)e to the order of 2cash3, the word cash 2does not purport to be the name of an( person3, and
hence the instrument is pa(ab)e to bearer. !he drawee ban" need not obtain an( indorsement of the
chec", but ma( pa( it to the person presenting it without an( indorsement.