Serra v. Go-Huna
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The plaintiff, Jaime Serra, as administrator, brought an action against the defendant, Go-Huna, to recover the price of lumber sold. Procedural History: The case was tried in the lower court, which rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The Appeal: The defendant appealed the decision of the lower court, denying that the lumber was brought by him or sold by the plaintiff.
Issue(s)
Whether the plaintiff, as administrator, sufficiently proved his legal personality and the ownership of the lumber in question. Whether the documentary and testimonial evidence presented were sufficient to support the judgment.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court. It held that the defendant's failure to expressly make the point regarding the plaintiff's representative character or the ownership of the lumber on trial below constituted a waiver of such objections. The documentary proof, consisting of the bill presented by the defendant made out against him in the name of the plaintiff as administrator and the receipt for part of the lumber, in light of the testimony of the plaintiff's witnesses and in the absence of contradictory proof, sufficed to supply the lack of the usual formal testimony.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court held that the defendant's failure to expressly raise the issue of the plaintiff's legal personality as administrator or the ownership of the lumber during the trial below resulted in a waiver of such objections. The Court noted that if the lumber had been sold by the intestate, formal proof of the administrator's representative character might have been required. However, since this point was not expressly made on trial, and the sale was made in the name of the plaintiff, the documentary evidence, including the bill presented by the defendant and the receipt for part of the lumber, along with the testimony of the plaintiff's witnesses, was deemed sufficient in the absence of contradictory proof. This demonstrates that procedural objections not timely raised are considered waived. On Issue 2: The Court found the documentary and testimonial evidence sufficient to support the judgment. The testimony of two witnesses for the plaintiff satisfactorily explained the circumstance that the receipt for part of the lumber was signed by another Chinaman, not the defendant. The bill presented by the defendant against himself in the name of the plaintiff as administrator, and the receipt for part of the lumber running to the plaintiff by name and signed by the defendant's agent, were considered adequate in the light of the testimony and the absence of contradictory proof. This upholds the principle that evidence, even if not strictly formal, can be sufficient if it is credible and not controverted.
Main Doctrine
In an action for the recovery of the price of goods sold, where the defendant fails to raise specific objections regarding the plaintiff's legal personality as administrator or the ownership of the property at the trial level, such objections are deemed waived and cannot be raised on appeal. Documentary evidence and testimonial evidence, in the absence of contradictory proof, may suffice to establish the plaintiff's claim and representative capacity.