VILLANUEVA vs ORO
their declared value which can be increase or decrease
FACTS
West Coast Insurance company issued 2 life
insurance policies on the life of Esperanza Villanueva
for: 2k maturing on April 1, 1943, and 3k maturing on
March 31, 1943.
The policies had this provision: The insurer agreed to
pay the insured IF living on April 1, 1943, or to the
beneficiary Bartolome Villanueva upon receipt of
due proof of the prior death of the insured during
the continuance of the policy.
Bartolome Villanueva died and was substituted by by
Mariano Villanueva, the brother of the insured.
Esperanza Bartolome survived the policies and died
in 1944 without claiming the proceeds of the
policies.
Adverse claims for the proceeds were filed by the
estate of Esperanza, the insured, AND Mariano, as
the beneficiary.
ISSUE
W/N the estate of Esperanza is entitled to the
proceeds? - YES
HELD
First, the policy contained an agreement that insured
is entitled to the benefits of the life insurance if she
is alive to a certain date. In the case at bar, the 2
policies will mature in 1943. However, the insured
died in 1944. Though unclaimed, it is of no question
that the proceeds will belong to her or her estate.
Despite the designation of a beneficiary, by express
agreement, the insured is entitled to the proceeds if
she lives up to the maturation period.
Second, the claim of Mariano is untenable because
though he is the beneficiary to the policies, his right
to the claim is contingent on the fact that the
insured, or Esperanza, should die before the
maturation period, for him, as the beneficiary, to be
entitled to the proceeds.
LOPEZ vs DEL ROSARIO
FACTS
Benita Quiogue de V. del Rosario (Mrs. del
Rosario), owner of a bonded warehouse where Froilan
Lopez, holder or 14 warehouse receipts and Elias
Zamora had their copra deposited
The warehouse receipts states an insurance of 1%
by giving 1 month's notice in writing
Lopez paid the insurance to May 18, 1920, but not
thereafter
June 6, 1920: the warehouse was destroyed by fire.
Only copra worth P49,985 was salvaged. At that time
Lopez was still liable for the storage and insurance of
P315.90
Mrs. Del Rosario submitted the insurance with
the arbitrators and seems to have satisfied all of the
persons who had copra stored in her warehouse,
including the stockholders in the Compaia Coprera de
Tayabas (whose stock she took over), with the
exception of Froilan Lopez
Ineffectual attempts by Mrs. Del Rosario to effect a
compromise with Lopez first for P71,994, later raised to
P72,724, and finally reduced to P17,000, were made.
But Lopez stubbornly contended, or, at least, his
attorney contended for him, that he should receive not
a centavo less than P88,595.43 (from
originally P107,990.40)
ISSUE:
W/N Mrs. Del Rosario should be held liable to Lopez even if
he has not paid the insurance at the time of the fire? - YES
HELD
Plaintiff's rights to the insurance money have not
been forfeited by failure to pay the insurance
provided for in the warehouse receipts. A
preponderance of the proof does not demonstrate
that the plaintiff ever ordered the cancellation of his
insurance with the defendant. Nor is it shown that
the plaintiff ever refused to pay the insurance when
the bills were presented to him, and that notice of an
intention to cancel the insurance was ever given the
plaintiff
plaintiff is entitled to P88,595.43, representing the
value of the goods stored, minus P7,185.88, his
share of the expenses, minus P315.90, due for
insurance and storage, or approximately a net
amount of P81,093.65, with legal interest. This sum
the defendant must disgorge.