Case ID: pr_34/html/0593-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Alore y\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Heirs of Arturo Díaz-Varcárcel, consisting of the children of his first marriage named María Luisa, Manuela, Arturo and Enrique Díaz-Curbelo, his widow, Amparo Gilestra, and his children by her named Alberto Arturo and Angel Luis Díaz-Gilestra, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Heirs of Acisclo Díaz-Varcárcel, consisting of his widow, Providencia Janer, his brother and sister, Gumersindo and Josefa Díaz-Varcárcel and his nephew Guillermo Escudero, and Octavio García Salgado, Defendants and Appellees.
    No. 3513.
    Argued March 13, 1925.
    Decided July 28, 1925.
    Appeal — Statement oe Case. — When the statement of the case filed by the appellant in the Supremo Court does not contain all of tlio probatory elements that were considered by the trial judge, the judgment will be affirmed.
    Second District Court of San Juan, M. Rodríguez Serra, J. Judgment for the defendants in an action for rescission of sale.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      R. Martinez Alvarez and J. P. Miranda for appellants. Manuel Be-nitez Flores for appellees.
   Mr. Justice Alore y

delivered the opinion of the court.

The plaintiffs brought tins’ action for the rescission of a deed of sale of two properties on the ground that it was executed to defraud the plaintiff creditors of the vendor and after judgment dismissing the complaint they took this appeal wherein they filed a statement of the case approved by the trial court.

The appellees called our attention in their brief to the fact that tire statement of the case to be considered in the appeal does not contain all of the evidence heard at the trial and that therefore we are not in position to reverse the judgment of the lower court as prayed for by the api pellants.

We have examined carefully the statement of the case and find that it does not contain the documentary evidence introduced at the trial and on which the court based the judgment appealed from, for the court refers in the opinion oil which its decision is founded to a certificate of the registry of property, to a certain clause of a will and to an administration proceeding. These documents do not appear in the statement of the case although it shows that they were introduced in evidence. The appellants also say in their Brief that they offered in evidence certificates of death, birth and marriage, a will, four promissory notes and the deed of sale sought to be rescinded, but these documents have not been copied into the statement of the case or even a summary of their pertinent parts, especially with regard to the deed and the will. The same is true of the other documents introduced by the defendants.

In view of the foregoing, and remembering that in the case of Ex parte Brac, 28 P.R.R. 341, we said that we can not interfere with the weighing of the evidence by the lower court when the transcript of the record does not bring up the duly certified documents submitted at the trial as evidence, we must affirm the judgment appealed from.