AGENCY

I. THE CONCEPT OF AGENCY

 Elements of Agency
 Bordador v. Luz, G.R. No. 130148, December 15, 19971
 Victorias Milling v. CA, G.R. No. 117356, June 19 2000
 Sps. Viloria v. Continental Airlines, G.R. No. 188288, January 16,
2012

 Effect of Agency: Integration and Extension

 Uy and Roxas v. CA, G.R. No. 120465, September 9, 1999
 Angeles v. PNR, G.R. No. 150128, August 31, 2006
 Ong v. CA, G.R. No. 119858, August 31, 2006
 PNB v. Ritratto, G.R. No. 142616. July 31, 2001
 Caram v. Laureta, G.R. No. L-28740, February 24, 1981

 Nature of Agency: General and Special

 Dominion Insurance v. CA G.R. No. 129919, February 6, 2002
 Veloso v. CA G.R. No. 102737. August 21, 1996
 Duñgo v. Lopena G.R. No. L-18377, December 29, 1962
 Vicente v. Geraldez G.R. No. L-32473, July 31, 1973
 Cosmic Lumber v. CA G.R. No. 114311, November 29, 1996
 Mercado v. Allied Banking Corporation G.R. No. 171460, July 27,
2007
 BPI v. De Coster G.R. No. 23181, March 16, 1925
 Insular Drug v. PNB G.R. No. 38816, November 3, 1933
 Hodges v. Salas G.R. No. L-42958, October 21 1936
 Bravo-Guerrero v. Bravo G.R. 152658, July 29, 2005
 Siasat v. IAC G.R. No. L-67889, October 10, 1985

II. ESTABLISHING AGENCY

 Oral or Written
 Air France v. CA, G.R. No. L-57339, December 29, 1983
 Cosmic Lumber V. CA, G.R. No. 114311, November 29, 1996
 Oesmer v. Paraiso Development, G.R. No. 157493, February 5,
2007

 Effect
 AF Realty v. Dieselman, G.R. No. 111448, January 16, 2002
 Pahud v. CA, G.R. No. 150346, August 25, 2006
 AF Realty v. Dieselman, G.R. No. 111448, January 16, 2002
1
Cases indicated in the syllabus are required to be read in the original.
 2
 Litonjua v. Eternity, G.R. No. 144805, June 8, 2006

 Express/Implied Agency and Agency by Estoppel

 Nogales v. Capitol Medical, G.R. No. 142625, December 19, 2006
 Philippine Realty v. Ley Construction, G.R. No. 165548, June 13,
2011

III. THE AGENT

 The Rights of Agents

 Danon v. Brimo & Co, G.R. No. 15823, September 12, 1921
 Tan v. Gullas, G.R. No. 143978, December 3, 2002
 Philippine Health-Care Providers v. Estrada, G.R. No. 171052,
January 28, 2008
 Sanchez v. Medicard, G.R. No. 141525, September 2, 2005
 Infante v. Cunanan, G.R. No. L-5180, August 31, 1953
 Lim v. Saban, G.R. No. 163720, December 15, 2004
 Prats v. CA, G.R. No. L-39822, January 31, 1978
 Manotok Brothers v. CA, G.R. No. 94753, April 7, 1993
 Uniland Resources v. DBP, G.R. No. 95909, August 16, 1991
 Domingo v. Domingo, G.R. No. L-30573, October 29, 1971
 Baltazar v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 136433, December 6, 2006
 Serona v. People, G.R. No. 130423, November 18, 2002

 The Obligations of Agents

 Woodchild v. Roxas, G.R. No. 140667, August 12, 2004
 Board of Liquidators v. Heirs of Maximo Kalaw, G.R. No. L-18805,
August 14, 1967
 San Juan v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 129549, September 19,
1998
 Francisco v. GSIS, G.R. No. L-18287, March 30, 1963
 British Airways v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 121824, January 29,
1998
 Severino v. Severino, G.R. No. 18058, January 16, 1923
 Murao v. People, G.R. No. 141485, June 30, 2005.
 Metrobank v. CA, G.R. No. 88866, February 18, 1991

 The Liability of Agents

 DBP v. CA, G.R. No. 109937, March 21, 1994
 Beaumont v. Prieto, G.R. No. 8988, March 30, 1916

IV. THE PRINCIPAL

 Obligations of the Principal

 Prieto v. CA, G.R. No. 158597, June 18, 2012
 3
 Filipinas Life v. Pedroso, G.R. 159489, February 4, 2008
 Manila Memorial v. Linsangan, G.R. No. 151319, November 22,
2004
 Woodchild v. Roxas, G.R. No. 140667, August 12, 2004
 Rural Bank of Milaor v. Ocfemia, G.R. No. 137686, February 8,
2000
 Cuison v. CA, G.R. No. 88539, October 26, 1993
 Country Bankers v. Keppel, G.R. No. 166044, June 18, 2012

 Liability of the Principal

 De Castro v. CA, G.R. No. 115838, July 18, 2002
 Gold Star Mining v. Lim-Jimena, G.R. No. L-25301
 PNB v. Agudelo, G.R. No. 39037, October 30, 1933

V. THE THIRD PARTY DEALING WITH THE AGENT

 Rights of Third Parties

 Keeler Electric v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 19001, November 11, 1922

 BA Finance v. CA, G.R. No. 94566, July 3, 1992

 NPC v. National Merchandising, G.R. Nos. L-33819 & L- 33897,
October 23, 1982
 Bacaltos Coal Mines v. CA, G.R. No. 114091, June 29, 1995

VI. EXTINGUISHING THE AGENCY

 Revocation
 Lustan v. CA, G.R. No. 111924, January 27, 1997
 CMS Logging v. CA, G.R. No. 41420, July 10, 1992
 Del Rosario v. Abad, G.R. No. L-10881, September 30, 1958
 Valenzuela v. CA, G.R. No. 83122, October 19, 1990
 Republic v. Evangelista, G.R. No. 156015, August 11, 2005
 Coleongco v. Claparols, G.R. No. L-18616, March 31, 1964

 Withdrawal
 Valera v. Velasco, G.R. No. 28050, March 13, 1928

 Death/Civil Interdiction/Insanity/Insolvency of the Principal

VII. DISTINGUISHING AGENCY FROM OTHER CONTRACTS

 In General
 Doles v. Angeles, G.R. No. 149353, June 26, 2006
 4
 Distinguished from Partnership
 Sevilla v. CA, G.R. Nos. L-41182-3, April 15, 1988

 Distinguished from Service Providers

 Nielson v. Lepanto, G.R. No. L-21601, December 28, 1968
 Fressel v. Mariano Uy Chaco, G.R. No. 10918, March 4, 1916
 Shell v. Firemen’s Insurance, G.R. No. L-8169, January 29, 1957

 Distinguished from Sale

 Quiroga v. Parsons Hardware, G.R. No. 11491, August 23, 1918
 American Rubber v. CIR, G.R. No. L-25965, June 30, 1975
 Ker v. Lingad, G.R. No. L-20871, April 30, 1971
 Gonzalo Puyat v. Arco Amusement, G.R. No. 47538, June 20, 1941
 Chua Ngo v. Universal Trading, G.R. No. L-2870, September 19,
1950

 Distinguished from Brokerage

 Hahn v. CA, G.R. No. 114074, January 22, 1997
 Tan v. Gullas, G.R. No. 143978, December 3, 2002

PARTNERSHIP

I. THE CONCEPT OF PARTNERSHIP

 The Nature of Partnership

 Lim Tong Lim v. Philippine Fishing Gear, G.R. No. 136448,
November 3, 1999
 Philex Mining v. CIR G.R. No. 148187, April 16, 2008, 551 SCRA
428
 AFISCO v. CA, G.R. No. 112675, January 25, 1999
 Gatchalian v. CIR, G.R. No. 45425, April 29, 1939
 Evangelista v. CIR, G.R. No. L-9996, October 15, 1957
 Vargas & Company v. Chan, G.R. No. 8576, February 11, 1915
 Aguila v. CA, G.R. No. 127347, November 25, 1999
 Campos Rueda v. Pacific Commercial, G.R. No. 18703, August 28,
1922.

 Rules to Determine Existence

 Evangelista v. CIR, G.R. No. L-9996, October 15, 1957
 Oña v. CIR, G.R. No. L-19342, May 25, 1972
 Obillos v. CIR, G.R. No. L-68118, October 29, 1985
 Pascual v. CIR, G.R. No. 78133, October 18, 1988
 Stern v. Dept. of Revenue 217 NW 2d 326 (1974)
 5
 Heirs of Jose Lim and Juliet Lim, G.R. No. 172690, March 3, 2010

II. FORMING THE PARTNERSHIP

 Corporations as Partners
J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Quirino Bolaños, G.R. No. L-4935, May 28, 1954

III. KINDS OF PARTNERSHIPS

 Particular Partnership
 CIR v. Suter G.R. No. L-25532, February 28, 1969

 Partnership by Estoppel
 Anfenson v. Banks, L.R.A 1918D, 482, 163 NW 608
 Brown v. Gernstein, 460 NE 2d 1043
 Hunter v. Croysdil, 337 P2d 174
 Wisconsin Telephone v. Lehman, 80 NW 2d 267

 Joint venture
 Litonjua v. Litonjua, G.R. Nos. 166299-300, December 13, 2005
 Primelink v. Lazatin-Magat, G.R. No. 167379, June 27, 2006
 Aurbach v. Sanitary Wares, G.R. No. 75875, December 15, 1989
 Mendiola v. CA, G.R. No. 159333, July 31, 2006
 Heirs of Tan Eng Kee v. CA, G.R. No. 126881, October 3, 2000
 J. Tiosejo Investment v. Spouses Ang, G.R. No. 174149, September
8, 2010

IV. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTNER

 Rights of Partners
 Stratemeyer v. West 466 NE 2d 306
 Cook v. Brundidge 533 SW2d 751
 First National Bank v. District Court, 652 P2d 613
 Hodge v. Garett, 614 P2d 420
 Backowski v. Solecki, 316 NW 2d 434

 Obligations of Partners
 Muñasque v. CA, G.R. No. L-39780, November 11, 1985

V. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTNERSHIP

VI. ENDING THE PARTNERSHIP

 Dissolution
 6
 Rojas v. Maglana, G.R. No. 30616, December 10, 1990.
 LeMay Bank v. Lawrence, 710 SW2d 318
 Lange v. Bartlett 360 NW2d 702
 Yu v. NLRC, G.R. No. 97212, June 30, 1993

 Winding-Up and Liquidation

 Villareal v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 144214, July 14, 2003
 Mahan v. Mahan 489 P2d 1197

VII. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

 The Limited Partner

 Delaney v. Fidelity Lease, 526 SW 2d 543
 Silvola v. Rowlett, 272 P. 2d 287
 Gast v. Petsinger, 323A 2d. 371
 Najim v. De Mesa, SEC Case No. 2526, September 21, 1987