Teodoro Velez v. Salomon Ramas

Summary

Plaintiffs sued to collect P2,303.60 under a written contract where defendants promised to pay money embezzled by defendant's wife/daughter to prevent her criminal prosecution for estafa. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's ruling that the contract was void due to illicit consideration. The agreement violated public policy by being designed to prevent criminal prosecution, making it unenforceable under Article 1275 of the Civil Code and the principle that no action arises from an illegal cause. The Court emphasized that contracts stifling criminal prosecutions are universally void regardless of where the illegality appears - whether in consideration, promise, or underlying purpose. The decision established important procedural precedent that defenses raised by appearing defendants benefit non-appearing co-defendants in common cause actions.