OSCAR DEL CARMEN, JR. vs.

GERONIMO BACOY

G.R. No. 173870. April 25, 2012

FACTS:

Spouses Emilia Bacoy Monsalud and Leonardo Monsalud, Sr. and their daughter Glenda Monsalud, were run over by a Fuso passenger jeep driven by Allan Maglasang and was registered in the name of petitioner. Consequently, a case was filed against Allan for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Multiple Homicide before the RTC, which said court declared Allan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged.

During the pendency of said criminal case, Emilia’s father, Geronimo Bacoy filed an independent civil action for damages based on culpa aquiliana to Allan and the petitioner. Defendants refused to assume civil liability for the victims’ deaths. Petitioner averred that the Monsaluds have no cause of action against them because Allan was not their employee anymore and the jeep was stolen when the incident happened. The RTC absolved the petitioner from all civil liability but was reversed by the CA.

ISSUE:

Whether the petitioner is liable for damages under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.

RULING:

The SC held the petitioner liable for quasi-delict resulting from his jeep’s use, as all requisites under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur are present. First, no person just walking along the road would suddenly be sideswiped and run over by an on-rushing vehicle unless the one in charge of the said vehicle had been negligent. Second, the jeep which caused the injury was under the exclusive control of petitioner as its owner. When petitioner entrusted the ignition key to Rodrigo (Allan’s friend), he had the power to instruct him with regard to the specific restrictions of the jeep’s use, including who or who may not drive it. As he is aware that the jeep may run without the ignition key, he also has the responsibility to park it safely and securely and to instruct his driver Rodrigo to observe the same precaution. Lastly, there was no showing that the death of the victims was due to any voluntary action or contribution on their part.

The aforementioned requisites having been met, there now arises a presumption of negligence against the petitioner, which he could have overcome by evidence that he exercised due care and diligence in preventing strangers from using his jeep. Absent the circumstance of unauthorized use or that the subject vehicle was stolen which are valid defenses available to a registered owner, the petitioner cannot escape his civil liability on this present case.

 

SPS. ALFREDO BONTILAO AND SHERLINA BONTILAOversus

DR. CARLOS GERONAG.R. No. 176675, September 25, 2010

FACTS:

On December 28, 1991, Dr. Carlos Gerona, an orthopedic surgeon, treated petitioners' son, eight (8)-year-old Allen Key Bontilao (Allen), for a fractured right wrist.. On June 4, 1992, Allen re-fractured the same wrist and was brought back to the hospital. Respondent performed a closed reduction procedure, with Dr. Vicente Jabagat (Dr. Jabagat) as the anesthesiologist. He allowed Allen to go home after the post reduction x-ray showed that the bones were properly aligned, but advised Allen's mother, petitioner Sherlina Bontilao, to bring Allen back for re-tightening of the cast not later than June 15, 1992.

Allen, however, was brought back to the hospital only on June 22, 1992. By then, because the cast had not been re-tightened, a rotational deformity had developed in Allen's arm. The x-ray examination showed that the deformity was caused by a re-displacement of the bone fragments, so it was agreed that an open reduction surgery will be conducted by respondent with Dr. Jabagat as the anesthesiologist.

During the operation, Dr. Jabagat failed to intubate the patient after five (5) attempts so anesthesia was administered through a gas mask. Respondent asked Dr. Jabagat if the operation should be postponed given the failure to intubate, but Dr. Jabagat said that it was alright to proceed. Respondent verified that Allen was breathing properly before proceeding with the surgery.[ As respondent was about to finish the suturing, Sherlina decided to go out of the operating room to make a telephone call and wait for her son. Later, she was informed that her son had died on the operating table. The cause of death was "asphyxia due to congestion and edema of the epiglottis.

ISSUE:

Whether respondent is liable for damages for Allen's death.

RULING:

The SC held that the court cannot properly declare that respondent failed to exercise the required standard of care as lead surgeon as to hold him liable for damages for Allen's death under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor. Petitioners failed to present substantial evidence of any specific act of negligence on respondent's part or of the surrounding facts and circumstances which would lead to the reasonable inference that the untoward consequence was caused by respondent's negligence. In fact, under the established facts, respondent appears to have observed the proper amount of care required under the circumstances. Therefore res ipsa loquitor could not be invoked on this present case due to lack of substantial evidence that the injury was caused by an agency or instrumentality under the exclusive control and management of the defendant, and that the injury was such that in the ordinary course of things would not happen if reasonable care had been used.