Held, That both V. and L. are liable for the death of the victim. As the spark of life went out, each wound was a contributing cause. Although a man can not be killed twice, two persons, acting independently, may contribute to his death and each be guilty of a homicide. (Per Malcolm J., in U. S. v. Abiog, R. G. No. 12747, decided November 12, 1917.)

RECENT DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PORTO RICO

(March 1917)

(REPORTED BY A. L.)

LAWYERS; APPEARANCE BY A LAWYER; RATIFICATION OF H S ACTS.-When a defendant, after a presumed agent of his has employed the services of a lawyer in order to dissolve an attachment made on his property, allows, after he gets information of the employment of the lawyer, that the proceedings continue without his taking any proper steps, this act amounts to a ratification on his part of the acts of the lawyer.-Aparicio Hermanos v. H. C. Christianson & Co.

ID.; PRESUMPTION OF REPRESENTATION.-The presumption in favor of the employment of counsel to represent a party can not easily be denied, and his acts are susceptible of easy ratification. This is a principle in favor of the bar. This presumption rests on the needs of court procedure, for otherwise it would be necessary at every step to stop and ask the lawyers as to the legality of their employment as counsel.-Id.

CAUSE OF ACTION; TRANSFER AND ASSIGNMENT OF A CONTRACT; PRESUMPTION OF CONSIDERATION.-The consideration of a transfer and assignment of a contract which is to be enforced to the complainant is not necessary to be alleged in the complaint in order that there be facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, for in accordance with article 1244 of the civil code (article..... of the civil code in force in the Philippines), the consideration is presumed to exist. -Ana María Sugar Company Inc. v. Carlo, et al.

RES ADJUDICATA; IDENTITY OF CAUSES AND PARTIES.-The creditors in certain orders approving memoranda of costs, expenses, disbursements, and lawyer's fese transferred and assigned their credits to the same person, who collected the amounts of the credits from the debtor. The latter subsequently demanded the return of the amounts of certain items of the memoranda from the assignee, but the demand was refused on the ground that the matter was one already adjudged. On appeal, it was held: That the assignee being a successor in interest (causahabiente) of the rights of the creditors, the litigants in this case are the same as the parties in the former suits on the memoranda of costs in accordance with the provisions of article 1219 of the civil code (corresponding to article.... of our code); that there exists a perfect identity of subject matter and of parties, for in the former actions for the approval of the memoranda, the question whether or not the items

in the memoranda were due or not was discussed, it having been decided there that they were legally due, and in the present action the issue turns on whether the same are due or not, and that to declare the complaint now founded is to give no effect to the questions already decided in the fomer suits.-Hernandez v. Benet.

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION; LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE; COUNSEL OF LAWYER.-In suits for malicious prosecution one of the essential requisites is the absence or lack of a probable cause, and for this reason the law protects a person from malicious prosecution if such person, before bringing the action, gives a detailed and reasonable account of all the facts to a lawyer in actual practice and of good professional standing, and the lawyer advises him that there are reasons for causing the arrest of the person who had offended him.-Torres v. Ramirez.

ID.; MISTAKEN ADVICE OF LAWYER; LACK OF CRIMINAL INTENTION.-A certain dispute arose between the parties as to the ownership of a certain piece of land. The plaintiff believing the palm trees on this land to be his cut them down and utilized them for his own purposes. The defendant believing in good faith that the plaintiff had taken the palm trees in utter disregard of his own right consulted his lawyer who advised him to file complaint for theft, thus obtaining the arrest of the plaintiff.

Held,: That even though the arrest was unusual and extraordinary, inasmuch as there was a dispute as to the ownership of the land from which the palm trees were taken and the lawyer ought to have known the absence of criminal intention on the part of the person cutting them and the impossibility of obtaining conviction the defendant was protected by the mistaken advice of counsel. The fact that the defendant testified on the witness stand that he had a very good opinion of the plaintiff and that even before the arrest he believed the plaintiff to be no thief but merely imprudent does not help the cause of the plaintiff for malicious prosecution, for the defendant was under no obligation to disclose his opinion to his lawyer but only to essential facts which were known to him as real facts and not opinion.-Id.

ID.; ARREST AND ACQUITTAL; LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE; MALICE -The mere proof of the arrest and acquittal of the plaintiff and the losses and injuries received by him by reason of a prosecution are not sufficient to establish a prima facie case of malicious prosecution; it is also necessary to prove, in addition, that there was a lack of a reasonable cause and the presence of malice. The arrest and acquittal alone do not show that there was no probable cause.—Id.

CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP; PURCHASE FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION; PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF CONJUGAL PROPERTY.-When from a deed of sale of real property purchased by any one of the spouses for valuable consideration it does not appear that the puchase has been made with his or her own funds, there is a presumption that the purchase has been made from the conjugal funds and the property is therefore considered as a conjugal property.-Longpré v. El Registrador.

ID.; PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY WITH CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP FUNDS; CONSENT OF THE HUSBAND.—A married woman can not buy by herself real estate with partnership funds unless the husband, who is the administrator of the conjugal partnership, gives his consent to the purchase.—Id.

WITNESSES; QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS; APPEAL.-A ruling of a trial court not allowing a witness to answer a question can not be considered on appeal when from the records the question and the answer expected to be elicited do not appear.-El Pueblo v. Navarro.

(NOTE.—These cases are given in "Revista de Legislación y Jurisprudencia" of the Porto Rico Bar.))

Anatalio Mañalac was the first graduate of the College of Law to accept a government position in the Department of Mindanao and Sulu as Justice of the Peace of the Municipality of Parang, Cotobato, on October 2, 1915. Later on as a reward of his efficient service, he was promoted to the position as Justice of the Peace of the Provincial Capital of Lanao on March 29, 1916. On account of the changes of personnel in the Department of Mindanao and Sulu, Mañalac was promoted to the position of Law Clerk for that Department, on May 21, 1917. Upon the promotion of Assistant Fiscal Alvarez to the position of Provincial Governor of Zamboanga, Mañalac was appointed to fill up his place.

1915

José Teodoro has been recently appointed as lecturer in the School of Education.

1917

José P. Melencio recently left for the United States where he expects to remain for a few days proceeding therefrom to Spain. He intends to enter a Spanish University to specialize in Civil Law and to perfect his knowledge of the Spanish language as he intends to be in the active practice of his profession upon his return.

ALUMNI SUBSCRIPTION TO THE LAW JOURNAL

The percentage of subscriptions for each class is the following: