Jose Mcmicking v. Mariano Nubla Co Piaco

Summary

This case involved competing claims by three creditors to P539.20 in proceeds from a sheriff's sale of debtor Que Biao Co's property. Two vendors (Nubla Co Piaco and Tan Oco) claimed preference under Civil Code Article 1922(1) as unpaid sellers, while landlord Velasco claimed preference under Article 1922(7) for unpaid rent. The trial court initially favored the vendors, distributing most funds between them pro rata while excluding the landlord. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that Article 1922 merely classifies preferred credits but doesn't establish inter-class priority. Applying Article 1926(4), all preferred creditors should share pro rata. However, the Court found the vendors failed to identify specific goods sold by each, a prerequisite for vendor preference. Since they couldn't prove individual ownership of particular sold items, they lost preferred status entirely. The Court ordered that only Velasco, as the sole remaining preferred creditor for rent, be paid first from the proceeds.