FACTS:

1. H and W are of legal age, Filipinos, spouses and residents of Cebu City. They
are the biological parents of Nea, barely four days old on the material dates in this case,
and six months old at the time of the filing of this complaint, and is, thus, represented by her
legal guardians and parents, H and W.

2. Lim Hua Hospital (or LHH, for brevity) is a corporation organized and existing by
virtue of the laws of the Philippines, with capacity to sue and be sued, and which may be
served with summons and other processes of this Honorable Court through any of their
responsible officers, namely, Chairman ABC and Chief Operating Officer DEF.

3. On the dates and material time, the attending physician was Dr. Y, and the
resident-physician in-charge was Dr. Z, both under the employ and supervision and control
of defendants.

.4. Relying on the representations repeatedly, consistently and widely publicized by

defendants that LHH is home of the region's top specialists and sub specialist”, and is
allegedly “the referral hospital of choice for physicians and patients seeking the highest level
of quality healthcare”, that “with … 1000 beds and.. state-of-the-art facilities and equipment,
[LHH is] considered as one of the biggest, most advanced, fully integrated and
comprehensive healthcare facility system in the country”, and “in 2009, … became the third
Joint Commission International accredited healthcare organization in the Philippines, the
only one in Visayas-Mindanao”1, H and W had their daughter, Nea, admitted to LHH on
Thursday, October 30, 2018 as she was suffering from on-and-off fever for two days.

5. Though hardly life-threatening, H and W still rushed Nea to the hospital for
immediate care and confinement as she was barely four days old at the time that the
recurring fever was observed.

6. At the time of admission, and except for the persistence of fever, Nea was
observed by the admitting physician and nurses to have good functional status. Her skin
was warm, of “good turgor and mobility”, has moist lips and tongue, clear breath sounds,
strong pulses, distinct hear sounds at normal rate and regular rhythm.

7. Upon admission in the late afternoon of October 30, IV port was inserted on her
left hand, dorsum side. The arm was wrapped in diaper, concealing most of the lower arm
from fingertips to elbow. The IV port itself was also not visible due to many layers of plaster
tape. Plaintiff Nea was placed on the 10th floor of the hospital, with the express assurance
of LHH admitting staff that pediatric staff would be available at this floor.

8. On that same night, H and W requested the emergency room nurse to check the
IV port for visible backflow, but such request was ignored. H and W made another request
later that night, but the ER nurse simply gave it a cursory check.

9. In the early morning of October 31st, H and W shared their concern with the

Page 1

nursing staff that urine output was less compared to the previous evening. H and W
reiterated their request to check the IV flow, but the IV port remained unchecked. Later that
same morning,they reiterated their concern to the resident pediatrician that urine output was
noticeably less, but the said concern elicited no reaction, and the IV port was still not
checked.

10. At around 1:00 in the morning of the next day, H and W shared her observation
with the duty nurse that Nea was expressing more pain and discomfort upon injection of the
antibiotics. She was told by the duty nurse that the medicine must be painful. The IV site
remained unchecked. At around 6:00 in the morning of the same day, plaintiffs repeated
their observation to the new duty nurse and requested again that the antibiotics be injected
slowly because Nea is expressing great pain and discomfort. In the afternoon of the same
day, H and W repeated the same concern and observation and the same request for
antibiotic to be injected slowly. In these instances, as in the previous instances, the IV site
was again not checked.

11. In the afternoon of November 1, both H and W and Nea’s nanny noticed
extreme swelling of upper arm, above her elbow. The lower arm was still completely
concealed in diaper wrapping which was applied upon admission on October 30th. They
asked the duty nurse to remove the diaper wrap and plaster taping, IV port and line. When
removed, Nea’s left hand had visible erythema, blistering, severe swelling, purple and
yellow coloring of the skin. The IV site has accumulated fluid-filled bollous 1.5 in diameter.
Photo of this most painful sight is hereto reproduced for easy reference:

12. Nea was discharged on November 3, 2014 with IV burn with cellulitis in her left
hand, per Medical Certificate issued by the attending physician. She was admitted for what
was an uncommon ailment of fever, and discharged with full-thickness chemical burn to
her left hand.

QUESTIONS:

1. Assume that culpa aquiliana and culpa criminal cases were filed. Identify who
may be made defendants and explain why.
2. State the defenses that the defendant/s may raise in the two cases.

Page 2