G.R. No. 34642 ; September 24, 1931
FABIOLA SEVERINO, accompanied by her husband RICARDO VERGARA, plaintiffs-appellees, vs. GUILLERMO SEVERINO, ET AL., defendants. ENRIQUE ECHAUS, appellant.

FACTS

Plaintiff Fabiola Severino, a recognized natural daughter of the deceased Melecio Severino, entered into a compromise agreement with defendant Guillermo Severino (Melecio’s son) to settle litigation over Melecio’s estate. Under the agreement, Guillermo agreed to pay P100,000 to Fabiola and Felicitas Villanueva (Melecio’s widow), payable in installments. Defendant-appellant Enrique Echaus signed the agreement as a guarantor for Guillermo. Guillermo failed to pay the final P20,000 installment due to Fabiola. Fabiola sued to recover this amount from Guillermo and Echaus as guarantor. The trial court held both liable, ordering execution first against Guillermo’s property, then against Echaus’s if insufficient. Echaus appealed, arguing his guaranty lacked consideration because he received nothing for signing.

ISSUE

Was the contract of guaranty signed by Echaus supported by sufficient consideration?

RULING

Yes. The compromise and dismissal of the prior lawsuit between the parties constituted valid consideration for the entire agreement, including the guaranty. A guarantor is bound by the same consideration that supports the principal contract. The detriment suffered by Fabiola and Felicitas in dismissing their lawsuit was adequate consideration, regardless of whether Echaus received any personal benefit. The judgment against Echaus as guarantor was affirmed.

AI Generated by Armztrong.