Collado v. Dela Vega

Summary

Eduardo invested P5,000,000.00 and US$82,000.00 in Victoria's stock business expecting monthly returns. When no stock certificates were issued and checks bounced, Eduardo filed estafa charges. The RTC acquitted Victoria on reasonable doubt and found no civil liability. The CA reversed on the civil aspect, finding preponderant evidence of P2,905,000.00 liability based on bank deposit slips and Victoria's admissions. The Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that criminal acquittal based on reasonable doubt doesn't preclude civil liability requiring only preponderance of evidence. The Court emphasized that Victoria acknowledged receiving investment funds, supported by documentary evidence of bank deposits. This case establishes that civil liability can survive criminal acquittal when different evidence standards apply, and that testimonial admissions combined with documentary evidence can establish preponderant proof for civil recovery.