Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
and are considered as punishment, nor to fines and penalties imposed by the
courts in criminal proceedings as punishments for crime
Code
1902
of Civil Procedure took effect Oct 1, 1901 prior to enactment of Philippine Bill of
Chapter 17, where the subject provision is found, is entitled Arrest of Defendant
Taken bodily from the Code of Civil Procedure of California
But, consti provision in California is different from the Philippines because in
California, they make an exception in the imprisonment from debt provision to
exclude cases of fraud
Case is similar to Tan Cong vs Stewart in that two Chinese commenced an action in CFI
Manila against another Chinaman (Tan Cong) for recover judgment for sum of P30 K. Tan
Cong was employed by the plaintiffs as their general agent and they requested him to
turn over the funds/stocks etc to the plaintiffs but he refused. CFI Manila ordered the
detention of the defendant. A habeas corpus petition was presented to the SC and in
their decision, Judge Johnson held that provisions of Sec 5 of the Philippine Bill expressly
prohibited the imprisonment of Philippine citizens in actions for the recovery of money in
a cause of action arising on a contract and ordered the release of the prisoner.
Application to Instant Case:
The action ending in CFI Manila (Casey vs Ganaway) is one predicated on an obligation
arising from a contract imprisonment of petitioner is in contravention of organic law
The holding in this case, however, doesnt make Chap XVII of the Code of Civil Procedure
invalid and should be limited to the facts of this case.
Ruling: Discharge of Ganaway