ASSIGN

ED
CASES SHORT FACTS (5-6 sentences only) ISSUE AND RULING DOCTRINE / LAW
PERSO
N
ZENARO 1. Reyes v. Petitioner Leah Alesna Reyes is the wife of the late Jorge Reyes. The other ISSUE: Whether or not petitioners have established specific acts of Art. 1733 (Civil Code) Common carriers, from the
SA, Sisters of petitioners were their children. Jorge was taken to the Mercy Community Clinic by negligence allegedly committed by respondent doctors. nature of their business and for reasons of public
PEACH Mercy Leah due to his recurring fever and chills for 5 days already. Dr. Marlyn Rico was policy, are bound to observe extraordinary diligence
BLOSSO Hospital, G. the resident physician and admitting physician who gave Jorge physical RULING: No. in the vigilance over the goods and for the safety of
examination and took his medical history. Dr. Rico ordered a Widal Test since she First, the Court provided that while petitioners presented Dr. Vacalares as an the passengers transported by them, according to
MAE R. No. suspected that Jorge could be suffering from typhoid fever. Upon examining the expert witness, they do not find the latter to be so as he is not a specialist on the circumstances of each case. . . .
GENESIS 130547, result of the test, Dr. Rico concluded that Jorge was positive for typhoid fever. infectious diseases like typhoid fever. Thus, Dr. Vacalares is not qualified to
DAVID October 3, Thereafter, Dr. Marvie Blanes attended to Jorge since Dr. Rico’s shift already prove that Dr. Rico erred in her diagnosis.
2000; ended. Upon examination of Jorge, Dr. Blanes also had the impression that Jorge
had typhoid fever. Dr. Blanes ordered the nurse Josephine Pagente to do a Second, the doctors presented by respondents clearly were experts on the
compatibility test with the antibiotic chloromycetin on Jorge. As she did not observe subject. They vouched for the correctness of Dr. Marlyn Rico’s diagnosis. Dr.
any adverse reaction by Jorge to chloromycetin, Dr. Blanes ordered the first 500mg Peter Gotiong, a diplomate whose specialization is infectious diseases and
of said antibiotic to be administered on Jorge at around 9pm. A second dose was microbiology and an associate professor at the Southwestern University
administered on Jorge about 3 hours later just before midnight. At around 2am, College of Medicine and the Gullas College of Medicine, testified that he has
Jorge died at 40 years old. already treated over a thousand cases of typhoid fever.

Petitioners filed before the RTC a complaint for damages against respondents
Sisters of Mercy, Sister Rose Palacio, Dr. Marvie Blanes, Dr. Marlyn Rico, and
nurse Josephine Pagente. Thereafter, petitioners amended their complaint to
implead Mercy Community Clinic and dropped Pagente as defendant. Their
principal contention was that Jorge’s death was due to the wrongful administration
of chloromycetin and that respondent doctors failed to exercise due care and
diligence.
Petitioners offered the testimony of Dr. Apolinar Vacalares who performed an
autopsy on Jorge. However, he did not open the skull to examine the brain. His
findings showed that Jorge’s gastro-intestinal tract was normal and that Jorge did
not die of typhoid fever.
Third, the CA correctly held that based on Harrison’s Principle of Internal
Medicine, chloramphenicol (generic of chloromycetin) is the drug of choice for
typhoid fever and that the interval of the first and second dose were still within
the medically acceptable limits.
Fourth, the standard of extraordinary diligence is peculiar to common carriers.
The practice of medicine is a profession engaged in only by qualified
individuals. It is a right earned through years of education, training, and by
first obtaining a license from the state through professional board
examinations.

Respondents offered the testimonies of Dr. Peter Gotiong and Dr. Ibarra Panopio.
Dr. Gotiong had already treated over a thousand cases of typhoid patients and
according to him, the Widal Test results ration of 1:320 would make him suspect
that Jorge had typhoid fever. Dr. Gotiong also noted that Dr. Vacalares’ autopsy
should have included an examination of the brain since the toxic effect of typhoid
fever may lead to meningitis. Dr. Panopio concluded that Dr. Vacalares’s autopsy
on Jorge was incomplete and thus inconclusive.

The trial court absolved respondents from the charges. The CA affirmed said
decision. Hence this petition.
TURLA, 2. Ramos v. Plaintiff Erlinda Ramos was considered a healthy woman except that she
GINA CA, G.R. experience some discomfort due to a stone in her gall bladder. She and her
RAMOS No. 124354, husband Rogelio decided to have her operated by Dr. Hosaka of DLSMC Hospital.
April 11, However, during the operation, as observed by Erlinda’s sister-in-law, Herminda
Cruz, who was the Dean of the College of Nursing at the Capitol Medical Center,
2002; and was present in the operation room, a problem happened during the intubation.
Dra. Gutierrez, the anesthesiologist said "ang hirap ma-intubate nito, mali yata ang
pagkakapasok. O lumalaki ang tiyan". Consequently, The patient's nailbed became
bluish and the patient was placed in a trendelenburg position — a position where
the head of the patient is placed in a position lower than her feet which is an
indication that there is a decrease of blood supply to the patient's brain.
Allegedly this was the proximate cause of Erlinda being comatosed after the
incident.
Petitioners filed a civil case for damages with the Regional Trial Court of Quezon
City against herein private respondents alleging negligence in the management and
care of Erlinda Ramos, in which they won, however, CA reversed the RTC’s
decision.
ISSUE: Res ipsa loquitur is a Latin phrase which literally
WON the CA erred in not applying the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur. means "the thing or the transaction speaks for itself."
RULING:Yes. The phrase "res ipsa loquitur'' is a maxim for the rule
The following requisites must be satisfactorily shown for res ipsa loquitur to that the fact of the occurrence of an injury, taken
apply. with the surrounding circumstances, may permit an
• The accident is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the absence inference or raise a presumption of negligence, or
of someone's negligence; make out a plaintiff's prima facie case, and present a
• It is caused by an instrumentality within the exclusive control of the question of fact for defendant to meet with an
defendant or defendants; and explanation.
• The possibility of contributing conduct which would make the plaintiff
responsible is eliminated.
In the present case, Erlinda submitted herself for cholecystectomy and
expected a routine general surgery to be performed on her gall bladder. On
that fateful day she delivered her person over to the care, custody and control
of private respondents who exercised complete and exclusive control over
her. At the time of submission, Erlinda was neurologically sound and, except
for a few minor discomforts, was likewise physically fit in mind and body.
However, during the administration of anesthesia and prior to the
performance of cholecystectomy she suffered irreparable damage to her
brain.
Private respondents themselves admitted in their testimony that the first
intubation was a failure. This fact was likewise observed by witness Cruz
when she heard respondent Dra. Gutierrez remarked, "Ang hirap ma-intubate
nito, mali yata ang pagkakapasok. O lumalaki ang tiyan."
Our courts face unique difficulty in adjudicating medical negligence cases
because physicians are not insurers of life and, they rarely set out to
intentionally cause injury or death to their patients. However, intent is
immaterial in negligence cases because where negligence exists and is
proven, the same automatically gives the injured a right to reparation for the
damage caused.
The decision and resolution of the appellate court appealed from are hereby
modified so as to award in favor of petitioners, and solidarily against private
respondents the following: 1) P1,352,000.00 as actual damages computed as
of the date of promulgation of this decision plus a monthly payment of P8,
000.00 up to the time that petitioner Erlinda Ramos expires or miraculously
survives; 2) P2,000,000.00 as moral damages, 3) P1,500,000.00 as
temperate damages; 4) P100,000.00 each as exemplary damages and
attorney's fees; and, 5) the costs of the suit.
TIBAY, 3. Solidum Gerald Albert Gercayo was born with a imperforated anus (walang butas). He
JUSTIN v. Pp, G. R. underwent colostomy to bring one end of the large intestine through the abdominal
No. 192123, wall, so he could excrete through a colostomy bag attached to the side of his body.
March 10,
when he was 3 y/o he was admitted at the Opsital ng Maynila. for a pull through
2014; operation.
Dr Resurreccion headed the team, assisted by Dr Lucerio, Dr. Valeria, and Dr Tibio.
Anesthesiologist included Dr Abella, Razon, and Solidum(petitioner).
During the operation, Gerald experience bradycardia(low heart rate?) and went
into a coma, he regained consciousness only after a month. He could no longer
see, hear, or move.
A complaint for reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries were filed
by Gerald's parents against the team of doctors alleging there was failure in
monitoring the anesthesia administered to Gerald.
STA.ANA, 4. Pp v. AAA testified that she was raped ("kinantot") by their neighbor Arman on January
IRISH Armando 26, 2008. She was sitting in a tricycle at the time when Arman approached her and
VIOLA Labrague, inquired what her problem was. He then asked her to come with him to a place
PRADO G.R. No. where she would sweep the floor. He directed her to lie down on the floor and
placed himself on top of her while he held her hands. He asked if he could sell her
225065, body, but she remained silent. He then forcibly inserted his penis into her vagina.
September She shouted "saklolo " as she felt the pain in her bleeding vagina. However, an old
23, 2017; woman vending at the ground floor exclaimed "wag kayong maingay kasi
nakakabulabog kami. " Moreover, Arman told her to shut up, otherwise, papers
would be placed inside her mouth. After accomplishing the deed, he directed her to
put on her clothes. He also got dressed and uttered "ang sarap." When she urinated
at the comfort room of the second floor, she noticed blood stains in her underwear.
After he left, she hurriedly went to her house and reported the incident to BBB.
When her parents discussed whether to put Arman in jail.
ISSUE: Medical negligence - an action upon mednegligence
Is the petitioner liable for medical negligence - whether crim, civil, admin - calls for the plaintiff to
prove by competent evidence each of the 4
RULING: elements:
No. Dr. Solidum is not liable for criminal negligence. Negligence is defined 1. duty owed by the physician to patient, as created
as the failure to observe, for the protection of the interests of another by physician patient relationship, to act in
person, that degree of care, precaution, and vigilance that the accordance with standards/norms;
circumstances justly demand, whereby such other person sufferes 2. breach of duty by physician's failure to act in
injury. The negligence must be the proximate cause of the injury. accordance with standards;
3. the causation ie there must be a reasonably close
An action upon megical negligence calls for the plaintiff to prove <SEE and causal connection between the negligent act or
DOCTRINE/LAW TAB FOR 4 ELEMENTS> omission and the resulting injury; and
4. damages suffered by the patient
In the medical prof, specific norms on standard of care to protect the patient
against unreasonable risk, commonly referred to as standards of care, set the
duty of the physician in rewspect of the patient. In attempting to fix a standard
by which a court may determine whether the physician has properly
performed the requisite duty toward the patient, expert medical testimony
from both the plaintiff and the defense experts is required.
In this case, prosecution presented no witness with special medical
qualifications in anesthesia to provide guidance. It would consequently be
truly difficulty, if not impossible, to determine whether the first three elements
of negligence and malpractice action were attendant. Findings did not
preclude the probability that other factors related to Gerald's major operation,
w/c could or could not necessarily be attributed to the admin of anesthesia,
had caused the hypoxia and had then led Gerald to experience bradycardia.
Dr. Vertido revealingly conlucded in his report that the anesthesiologists
followed normal routine and precautionary measures.
ISSUE: Whether or not AAA’s testimony is incredulous and contrary to Suffice it to say that a medico-legal report is not
human nature and experience. indispensable to the prosecution of a rape case; it is
an evidence that is merely corroborative in nature.
RULING: NO. The Court is one with the RTC and CA in applying the
jurisprudential principle that testimonies of child victims are given full weight
and credit, for when a woman or a girl-child says that she has been raped,
she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was indeed
committed. As found by the RTC and CA, AAA's testimony was candid,
spontaneous, and consistent. We find no cogent reason to deviate from such
finding.Besides, as can be gleaned from the records, the assailed findings
and ruling were not solely based on AAA's testimony. The testimonies of the
other prosecution witnesses, corroborating that of AAA's, were also
considered. Thus, while it has been held in the past that the accused in rape
cases may be convicted solely on the basis of the victim's testimony which
passed the test of credibility, in this case, there is more than sufficient
evidence presented to arrive at such conclusion. Accused-appellant's
argument that AAA's demeanor after the alleged rape incidents was
unbelievable and contrary to human experience also could not sway the
Court. As already settled in jurisprudence, not all victims react the same way.
Some people may cry out, some may faint, some may be shocked into
insensibility, others may appear to yield to the intrusion. Some may offer
strong resistance, while others may be too intimidated to offer any resistance
at all. Further, even if the Court accepts as a fact that AAA is no longer a
virgin because the deeply-healed lacerations on her hymen was inflicted
much earlier than the time of the alleged rape incident, such does not
automatically result to Arman's acquittal. Suffice it to say that a medico-
legal report is not indispensable to the prosecution of a rape case; it is
an evidence that is merely corroborative in nature.
SERRAN 5. Pp v. In their first year of marriage, Marivic and Ben Genosa lived happily but soon ISSUE/S: A battered woman has been defined as a woman
O, Marivic thereafter, the couple would quarrel often and their fights would become violent. On 1.) Whether or not appellant can validly invoke the Battered Woman "who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical
JULIUS Genosa, G. the night of the killing, appellant, who was then eight months pregnant, and the Syndrome as constituting self-defense; or psychological behavior by a man in order to
R. No. victim quarreled. Frightened that her husband would hurt her and wanting to make 2.) Whether or not treachery attended the killing. coerce her to do something he wants her to do
sure she would deliver her baby safely, appellant admitted having killed the victim, without concern for her rights. Battered women
135981, who was then sleeping at the time, with the use of a gun and was convicted of the include wives or women in any form of intimate
January 15, crime of parricide. Experts opined that Marivic fits the profile of a battered woman RULING: relationship with men. Furthermore, in order to be
2004; syndrome and at the time she killed her husband, her mental condition was that she No, the Court ruled in the negative on both issues. classified as a battered woman, the couple must go
was re-experiencing the trauma, together with the imprint of all the abuses that she through the battering cycle at least twice. Any
had experienced in the past. 1.) The Court held that the defense failed to establish all the elements of self- woman may find herself in an abusive relationship
defense arising from the battered woman syndrome, to wit: (a) each of the with a man once. If it occurs a second time, and she
phases of the cycle of violence must be proven to have characterized at least remains in the situation, she is defined as a battered
two battering episodes between the appellant and her intimate partner; (b) the woman."
final acute battering episode preceding the killing of the batterer must have
produced in the battered persons mind an actual fear of an imminent harm
from her batterer and an honest belief that she needed to use force in order to
save her life; and (c) at the time of the killing, the batterer must have posed
probable – not necessarily immediate and actual – grave harm to the
accused, based on the history of violence perpetrated by the former against
the latter. Taken altogether, these circumstances could satisfy the requisites
of self-defense.

Under the existing facts of the case, however, not all of these were duly
established. Here, there was a sufficient time interval between the unlawful
aggression of Ben and her fatal attack upon him. In fact, she had already
been able to withdraw from his violent behavior and escape to their children’s
bedroom. The attack had apparently ceased and the reality or even
imminence of the danger he posed had ended altogether. Ben was no longer
in a position that presented an actual threat on her life or safety.

2.) The Court ruled that when a killing is preceded by an argument or a

quarrel, treachery cannot be appreciated as a qualifying circumstance,
because the deceased may be said to have been forewarned and to have
anticipated aggression from the assailant. Moreover, in order to appreciate
alevosia, the method of assault adopted by the aggressor must have been
consciously and deliberately chosen for the specific purpose of accomplishing
the unlawful act without risk from any defense that might be put up by the
party attacked. Here, there is no showing that appellant intentionally chose a
specific means of successfully attacking her husband without any risk to
herself from any retaliatory act that he might make. It appears that the thought
of using the gun occurred to her only at about the same moment when she
decided to kill her batterer-spouse. Thus, in the absence of any convincing
proof that she consciously and deliberately employed the method by which
she committed the crime in order to ensure its execution, the Court resolved
the doubt in her favor.
SECOLLE 6. Garcia. Respondent, Ranida D. Salvador, started working as a trainee in the Accounting ISSUE: Whether Garcia should be held liable liable for damages to the Owners and operators of clinical laboratories have
S, RIO Jr. v. Department of Limay Bulk Handling Terminal, Inc. As a prerequisite for regular respondents for issuing an incorrect HBsAG test result. the duty to comply with statutes, as well as rules and
Salvador, employment, she underwent a medical examination at the Community Diagnostic regulations, purposely promulgated to protect and
G. R. No. Center (CDC). Garcia who is a medical technologist, conducted the HBs Ag RULING: YES. Owners and operators of clinical laboratories have the duty to promote the health of the people by preventing the
(Hepatitis B Surface Antigen) test and issued the test result indicating that Ranida comply with statutes, as well as rules and regulations, purposely promulgated operation of substandard, improperly managed and
168512, was "HBs Ag: Reactive." The result bore the name and signature of Garcia as to protect and promote the health of the people by preventing the operation of inadequately supported clinical laboratories and by
March 20, examiner and the rubber stamp signature of Castro as pathologist. substandard, improperly managed and inadequately supported clinical improving the quality of performance of clinical
2007; laboratories and by improving the quality of performance of clinical laboratory laboratory examinations. Their business is
When Ranida submitted the test result to Dr. Sto. Domingo, the Company examinations. Their business is impressed with public interest, as such, high impressed with public interest, as such, high
physician, the latter apprised her that the findings indicated that she is suffering standards of performance are expected from them. standards of performance are expected from them.
from Hepatitis B, a liver disease. Thus, based on the medical report submitted by
Sto. Domingo, the Company terminated Ranida’s employment for failing the In fine, violation of a statutory duty is negligence. Where the law imposes
physical examination. upon a person the duty to do something, his omission or non-performance will
render him liable to whoever may be injured thereby.
When Ranida informed her father, Ramon, about her ailment, the latter suffered a
heart attack and was confined at the Bataan Doctors Hospital. During Ramon’s A clinical laboratory must be administered, directed and supervised by a
confinement, Ranida underwent another HBs Ag test at the said hospital and the licensed physician authorized by the Secretary of Health, like a pathologist
result indicated that she is non-reactive. She informed Sto. Domingo of this who is specially trained in methods of laboratory medicine; that the medical
development but was told that the test conducted by CDC was more reliable technologist must be under the supervision of the pathologist or a licensed
because it used the Micro-Elisa Method. physician; and that the results of any examination may be released only to the
requesting physician or his authorized representative upon the direction of the
Thus, Ranida went back to CDC for confirmatory testing, and this time, the Anti-HBs laboratory pathologist. These rules are intended for the protection of the
test conducted on her indicated a "Negative" result. Ranida also underwent another public by preventing performance of substandard clinical examinations by
HBs Ag test at the Bataan Doctors Hospital using the Micro-Elisa Method. The laboratories whose personnel are not properly supervised. The public
result indicated that she was non-reactive. demands no less than an effective and efficient performance of clinical
laboratory examinations through compliance with the quality standards set by
Ranida submitted the test results from Bataan Doctors Hospital and CDC to the laws and regulations.
Executive Officer of the Company who requested her to undergo another similar
test before her re-employment would be considered. Thus, CDC conducted another The Supreme Court ruled that petitioner Garcia failed to comply with these
HBs Ag test on Ranida which indicated a "Negative" result. Thereafter, the standards. First, CDC is not administered, directed and supervised by a
Company rehired Ranida. licensed physician as required by law, but by Ma. Ruby C. Calderon, a
licensed Medical Technologist. Second, Garcia conducted the HBsAG test of
Ranida and Ramon filed a complaint for damages against petitioner Garcia and a respondent Ranida without the supervision of defendant-appellee Castro.
purportedly unknown pathologist of CDC, claiming that, by reason of the erroneous Last, the disputed HBsAG test result was released to respondent Ranida
interpretation of the results of Ranida’s examination, she lost her job and suffered without the authorization of defendant-appellee Castro.
serious mental anxiety, trauma and sleepless nights, while Ramon was hospitalized
and lost business opportunities. Garcia may not have intended to cause the consequences which followed
after the release of the HBsAG test result. However, his failure to comply with
the laws and rules promulgated and issued for the protection of public safety
and interest is failure to observe that care which a reasonably prudent health
care provider would observe. Thus, his act or omission constitutes a breach of
duty.

Indubitably, Ranida suffered injury as a direct consequence of Garcia’s failure

to comply with the mandate of the laws and rules aforequoted. She was
terminated from the service for failing the physical examination; suffered
anxiety because of the diagnosis; and was compelled to undergo several
more tests. All these could have been avoided had the proper safeguards
been scrupulously followed in conducting the clinical examination and
releasing the clinical report.

DISPOSITIVE: Respondents won. Affirmed the CA’s ruling.

SALVE, 7. Cruz v. Rowena Umali de Ocampo, accompanied her mother, respondent Lydia Umali, to
VIVIALIN CA, G.R. the Perpetual Help Clinic and General Hospital situated in San Pablo City, Laguna.
E No. 122445, Prior to March 22, 1991, Lydia was examined by the petitioner who found a
QUIDES Nov. 18, “Myoma” in her uterus, and scheduled her for a hysterectomy operation on March
23, 1991. Rowena and her mother slept in the clinic on the evening of March 22, as
1997; the latter was to be operated on the next day. According to Rowena, she noticed
that the clinic was untidy and the windows and the floor were very dusty prompting
her to ask the attendant fora rag to wipe the window and floor with. Prior to the
operation, Rowena tried to convince her mother to not proceed with the operation
and even asked petitioner for it to be postponed, however it still pushed through
after the petitioner told Lydia that operation must be done as scheduled. During the
operation, the assisting doctor of the petitioner, Dr. Ercillo went out of the operating
room and asked that tagmet ampules be bought which was followed by another
instruction to buy a bag of blood. After the operation, when Lydia came out of the
OR, another bag of blood was requested to be bought, however, the same was not
bought due to unavailability of type A from the blood bank. Thereafter a person
arrived to donate blood which was later transferred to Lydia. Rowena then noticed
her mother, who was attached to an oxygen tank, gasping for breath apparently, the
oxygen tank is empty, so her husband and petitioner’s driver bought an oxygen.
Later, without the knowledge of Lydia’s relatives, she was decided by the doctors to
be transferred to San Pablo District Hospital where she was supposed to be re-
operated. After Lydia experienced shocks, she died.
ISSUE: W/n there is a breach of duty on the part of the petitioner surgeon as In litigations involving medical negligence, the
well as a causal connection of such breach and the resulting death of his plaintiff has the burden of establishing appellant’s
patient. negligence and for a reasonable conclusion of
negligence, there must be proof of breach of duty on
RULING: No. In litigations involving medical negligence, the plaintiff has the the part of the surgeon as well as causal connection
burden of establishing appellant's negligence and for a reasonable conclusion of such breach and the resulting death of his patient.
of negligence, there must be proof of breach of duty on the part of the
surgeon as well as a causal connection of such breach and the resulting
death of his patient. It is significant to state at this juncture that the autopsy
conducted by Dr. Arizala on the body of Lydia did not reveal any untied or
unsutured cut blood vessel nor was there any indication that the tie or suture
of a cut blood vessel had become loose thereby causing the hemorrhage.
This Court has no recourse but to rely on the expert testimonies rendered by
both prosecution and defense witnesses that substantiate rather than
contradict petitioner's allegation that the cause of Lydia's death was DIC
which, as attested to by an expert witness, cannot be attributed to the
petitioner's fault or negligence. The probability that Lydia's death was caused
by DIC was unrebutted during trial and has engendered in the mind of this
Court a reasonable doubt as to the petitioner's guilt. Thus, her acquittal of the
crime of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, but this Court finds the
petitioner civilly liable for the death of Lydia Umali, for while a conviction of a
crime requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, only a preponderance of
evidence is required to establish civil liability.
SALISA, 8. Batiquin Dr. Batiquin, with the assistance of Dr. Sy performed a simple caesarean section on ISSUE: Whether or not the CA committed grave abuse of discretion The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur means that "Where the thing which cau
ARLENE v. CA, G.R. Mrs. Villegas. Soon after leaving the Hospital Mrs. Villegas began to suffer amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it gave credence to
CARBON No. 118231, abdominal pains and complained of being feverish. She also gradually lost her testimonies punctured with contradictions and falsities.
ELL July 5, appetite, so she consulted Dr. Batiquin at the latter's polyclinic who prescribed her
certain medicines.
1996; RULING: No. Well-settled is the rule that positive testimony is stronger than
The abdominal pains and fever kept on recurring and bothered Mrs. Villegas to no negative testimony. Of course, as the petitioners advocate, such positive
end despite the medications administered by Dr. Batiquin. When the pains became testimony must come from a credible source. While the petitioners claim that
unbearable and she was rapidly losing weight she consulted Dr. Kho.She took contradictions and falsities punctured Dr. Kho's testimony, a regarding of the
blood tests of Plaintiff. A blood count showed that Mrs. Villegas had an infection said testimony reveals no such infirmity and establishes Dr. Kho as a credible
inside her abdominal cavity. The results of all those examinations impelled Dr. Kho witness. Dr. Kho was frank throughout her turn on the witness stand.
to suggest that Mrs. Villegas submit to another surgery to which the latter agreed. Furthermore, no motive to state any untruth was ever imputed against Dr.
When Dr. Kho opened the abdomen of Mrs. Villegas she found whitish-yellow Kho, leaving her trustworthiness unimpaired. Her positive testimony[that a
discharge inside, an ovarian cyst on each of the left and right ovaries which gave piece of rubber was indeed found in private respondent Villega's abdomen
out pus, dirt and pus behind the uterus, and a piece of rubber material on the right prevails over the negative testimony in favor of the petitioners.
side of the uterus embedded on the ovarian cyst. This piece of rubber material
which Dr. Kho described as a "foreign body" looked like a piece of a "rubber glove" The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur as a rule of evidence is peculiar to the law of
and it could have been a torn section of a surgeon's gloves or could have come negligence which recognizes that prima facie negligence may be established
from other sources. And this foreign body was the cause of the infection of the without direct proof and furnishes a substitute for specific proof of negligence.
ovaries and consequently of all the discomfort suffered by Mrs. Villegas after her The doctrine is not a rule of substantive law, but merely a mode of proof or a
delivery. mere procedural convenience. The rule, when applicable to the facts and
However, there are two different versions on the whereabouts of that offending circumstances of a particular case, is not intended to and does not dispense
"rubber" — (1) that it was sent to the Pathologist in Cebu as testified to in Court by with the requirement of proof of culpable negligence on the party charged. It
Dr. Kho and (2) that Dr. Kho threw it away as told by her to Defendant. The failure merely determines and regulates what shall be prima facie evidence thereof
of the Plaintiffs to reconcile these two different versions serve only to weaken their and facilitates the burden of plaintiff of proving a breach of the duty of due
claim against Defendant Batiquin care. The doctrine can be invoked when and only when, under the
circumstances involved, direct evidence is absent and not readily available.
All told, the trial court held in favor of the petitioners herein. In the instant case, all the requisites for recourse to the doctrine are present.
The Court of Appeals reviewed the entirety of Dr. Kho's testimony and, even without First, the entire proceedings of the caesarean section were under the
admitting the private respondents' documentary evidence, deemed Dr. Kho's exclusive control of Dr. Batiquin. In this light, the private respondents were
positive testimony to establish that a piece of rubber was found near private bereft of direct evidence as to the actual culprit or the exact cause of the
respondent Villegas's uterus. Thus, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of foreign object finding its way into private respondent Villegas's body, which,
the trial court. needless to say, does not occur unless through the intersection of negligence.
The petitioners appealed to the SC claiming that the appellate court: (1) committed Second, since aside from the caesarean section, private respondent Villegas
grave abuse of discretion by resorting to findings of fact not supported by the underwent no other operation which could have caused the offending piece of
evidence on record, and (2) exceeded its discretion, amounting to lack or excess of rubber to appear in her uterus, it stands to reason that such could only have
jurisdiction, when it gave credence to testimonies punctured with contradictions and been a by-product of the caesarean section performed by Dr. Batiquin. The
falsities. petitioners, in this regard, failed to overcome the presumption of negligence
arising from resort to the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Dr. Batiquin is therefore
liable for negligently leaving behind a piece of rubber in private respondent
Villegas's abdomen and for all the adverse effects thereof.
SABLAS, 9. People of Together with Ramon Salcedo, Jr. and Raul Salcedo, who have remained at large,
MICHAEL the appellant Ruel Tuy was charged with murder in the RTC in Calabanga, Camarines
M. Philippines Sur for the killing of Orlando Barrameda in Brgy.Bani, Tinambac, Camarines Sur.
vs. Ruel
Upon arraignment, the accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge of
Tuy, G.R. murder. Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.
No. 179476;
For the Prosecution, Severino Barrameda (Severino), the son of the victim,
declared that he had witnessed the Salcedos shooting and Tuy hacking his father.
The medico-legal evidence presented through Dr. Salvador Betito, Jr. (Betito), who
had conducted the autopsy, established that the victim had sustained five hack
wounds and two gunshot wounds. Betito concluded that the cause of death was
rapid external and internal hemorrhage secondary to multiple gunshot wounds and
hack wounds.
In his defense, Tuy denied his participation in the crime and claimed that he was
processing copra at the time of the killing in Sitio Olango, Brgy. Bani Tinambac,
Camarines Sur. His brother Ramil Tuy corroborated him.
ISSUE: Whether or not Tuy is guilty of murder. The failure to prove the physical impossibility of
one's presence at the crime scene negates alibi.
RULING: Yes. Firstly, the findings of the RTC are accorded the highest
degree of respect, especially if adopted and confirmed by the CA, because of
the first-hand opportunity of the trial judge to observe the demeanor of the
witnesses when they testified at trial; such findings are final and conclusive
and may not be reviewed on appeal unless there is clear misapprehension of
facts. Here, there was no showing that the RTC and the CA erred in
appreciating the worth of Severino's eyewitness testimony.
Secondly, the CA and the RTC rejected the alibi of Tuy. We agree with their
rejection. To begin with, his absence from the scene of the murder was not
firmly established considering that he admitted that he could navigate the
distance between Brgy. Olango (where he was supposed to be) and Brgy.
Bani (where the crime was committed) in an hour by paddle boat and in less
than that time by motorized banca. Also, eyewitness Severino positively
identified him as having hacked his father. The failure of Tuy to prove the
physical impossibility of his presence at the crime scene negated his alibi.

The RTC rendered its decision convicting Tuy of murder, and archiving the case as
against the Salcedos. On appeal, the CA affirmed the conviction, rejecting Tuy's
defenses of denial and alibi. It ruled that it was still physically possible for him to
come from Brgy. Olango and be at the seashore of Brgy.Bani, Tinambac,
Camarines Sur where the killing happened.
And, thirdly, the medico-legal evidence indicating that the victim sustained
several hack wounds entirely corroborated Severino's recollection on the
hacking.

RABELIS 10. Antonio Estrelita Vizconde and her daughters Carmela and Jennifer were brutally slain at ISSUE: Whether or not the Court should acquit Webb given the government’s
TA, MA. Lejano vs their home. The police arrested a group of suspects but the court smelled a failure to produce the semen specimen found on Carmela’s cadaver?
IVY People of frameup and ordered them discharged. The identities of the real perpetrators
NHAOMI the remained a mystery. RULING: No.
Four years later, NCI announced it had solved a crime and presented star-witness Arizona vs. Youngblood overtook Brady vs. Maryland where the US SC held
B. Philippines, Jessica Alfaro. She pointed to the accused-appellants as culprits and tagged that the State is not required to preserve the semen specimen unless the
G.R. No. accused officer Gerardo Biong as an accessory after that fact. Alfaro claimed that accused is able to show bad faith on the part of the prosecution of the police.
176389, she initially wanted to protect accused Estrada her former bf and accused Here, the State presented a medical expert who testified on the existence of
December Gatchalian a relative. the specimen and Webb in fact sought to have the same subjected to DNA
14, 2010; As a result of its initial deliberation in this case, the Court issued a Resolution test.
People of granting the request of Webb to submit for DNA analysis the semen specimen However, Alfaro is not deemed to be a credible witness. She did not show up
the taken from Carmela’s cadaver, which specimen was then believed still under the at the NBI as a spontaneous witness bothered by her conscience. She had
Philippines safekeeping of the NBI. The Court granted the request to give the accused and the been hanging around that agency for some time as a stool pigeon, one paid
prosecution access to scientific evidence that they might want to avail themselves for mixing up with criminals and squealing on them.
vs. Hubert
of, leading to a correct decision in the case. Further, her testimony was inherently incredible. Her story that Gatchalian,
Jeffrey P. Fernandez, Estrada, Rodriguez, and Filart agreed to take their turns raping
Webb, et Carmela is incongruent with their indifference, exemplified by remaining
al., G.R. No. outside the house, milling under a street light, visible to neighbors and
176864. passersby, and showing no interest in the developments inside the house, like
if it was their turn to rape Carmela.
Wherefore, the Court reverses and sets aside the decision. Accused-
appellants are acquitted for failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt
beyond reasonable doubt.