FE CAYAO-LASAM VS. SPS.

RAMOLETE

Doctrine: Where the immediate cause of an accident resulting in an injury is the plaintiff’s own act, which
contributed to the principal occurrence as one of its determining factors, he cannot recover damages for the
injury.

Facts: 3 months pregnant Mrs. Ramolete was brought to Lorma Medical Center (LMC) due to vaginal bleeding.
Upon advice of petitioner related via telephone, she was admitted to the LMC. A pelvic sonogram was conducted
revealing the fetus weak cardiac pulsation. The following day, Editha repeat pelvic sonogram showed that aside
from the fetus weak cardiac pulsation, no fetal movement was also appreciated. Due to persistent and profuse
vaginal bleeding, petitioner advised her to undergo “raspa”. She was discharged the following day. Editha
supposed to have a follow-up evaluation a month after but she did not return. 2 months after, she was once
again brought at the LMC, as she was suffering from vomiting and severe abdominal pains. She was attended by
Drs. Dela Cruz, Mayo and Komiya. Dr. Mayo allegedly informed Editha that there was a dead fetus in the latter’s
womb, after Editha went laparectomy, she was found to have massive intra-abdominal hemorrhage and ruptured
uterus. Thus, she had to go hysterectomy and as a result no more chance to bear a child.

Issue: WON the proximate cause of the injury is Mrs. Ramolete’s own negligence?

Ruling: YES. When complainant was discharged on July 31, 1994, herein respondent advised her to return on
August 4, 1994 or 4 days after the D&C. This advice was clear in complainant’s Discharge Sheet. However,
complainant failed to do so. This being the case, the chain of continuity as required in order that the doctrine of
proximate cause can be validly invoked was interrupted. Had she returned, the respondent could have examined
her thoroughly. Besides, the tool kuno na ginagamit sa raspa could not have possibly reached that point where
the “hostilities” actually happened. The omission in not returning for a follow-up evaluation played a substantial
part in bringing about Mrs. Ramolete’s own injury. Had she returned, the doctor could have conducted the
proper medical tests and procedure necessary to determine her health condition and applied the corresponding
treatment which could have prevented the rupture of her uterus.