Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 54 views

    11 Estopa Vs Biansay

    Uploaded by

    rhod leyson
    Erlinda Estopa sued Loreta Piansay Jr. for breach of promise to marry after Piansay ended their relationship in December 1957 despite consistently promising marriage for several months prior. Estopa sought compensation for damages to her honor after her efforts to compel Piansay to uphold his promise, including asking his parents for help, proved futile. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the mere breach of a promise to marry without additional wrongful acts is not grounds to award damages.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    11 Estopa Vs Biansay

    Uploaded by

    rhod leyson
    54 views1 page
    Erlinda Estopa sued Loreta Piansay Jr. for breach of promise to marry after Piansay ended their relationship in December 1957 despite consistently promising marriage for several months prior. Estopa sought compensation for damages to her honor after her efforts to compel Piansay to uphold his promise, including asking his parents for help, proved futile. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the mere breach of a promise to marry without additional wrongful acts is not grounds to award damages.

    Original Description:

    Estopa vs Biansay CAse Digest

    Original Title

    11 Estopa vs Biansay

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Erlinda Estopa sued Loreta Piansay Jr. for breach of promise to marry after Piansay ended their relationship in December 1957 despite consistently promising marriage for several months prior. Estopa sought compensation for damages to her honor after her efforts to compel Piansay to uphold his promise, including asking his parents for help, proved futile. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the mere breach of a promise to marry without additional wrongful acts is not grounds to award damages.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    54 views1 page

    11 Estopa Vs Biansay

    Uploaded by

    rhod leyson
    Erlinda Estopa sued Loreta Piansay Jr. for breach of promise to marry after Piansay ended their relationship in December 1957 despite consistently promising marriage for several months prior. Estopa sought compensation for damages to her honor after her efforts to compel Piansay to uphold his promise, including asking his parents for help, proved futile. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the mere breach of a promise to marry without additional wrongful acts is not grounds to award damages.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Estopa vs Biansay, L-14628, September 30, 1960

    FACTS:

    Erlinda Estopa, 23 yrs. old, stated that she fell in love and submitted herself completely to the
    defendant Loreta Piansay, Jr., sometime in September, 1957, after a courtship that lasted for a
    couple of months during which period the defendant consistently promised and succeeded to
    make her believe in him that he was going to marry her. In December, 1957, the plaintiff was
    informed that defendant was backing out from his promise of marriage. She demanded
    defendant's compliance to his promise in order to vindicate her honor, and went to the extent
    of asking the help of defendant's parents, but all her efforts were in vain.

    Finally, realizing that her efforts were futile, she decided to file her complaint, not to compel
    defendant to marry her, but to demand from him a compensation for the damages that she
    sustained.

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not the defendant is liable damages for mere breach of a promise to marry.

    RULING:

    No. The Supreme Court ruled that the mere breach of a promise to marry is not an actionable
    wrong. In this case, the defendant may not be condemned to pay for damages.

    You might also like