Title: Reyes vs.

Sisters of Mercy Hospital

Case: G.R. No. 130547

Decision Date: Oct. 03, 2000

Facts: Jorge Reyes was suffering from recurring fever with chills. His wife, Leah
Alesna Reyes brought him to the Mercy Community Clinic.

Dr. Rico, the attending physician, suspected that Jorge has Typhoid Fever
since the locale was then prevalent with said disease thus ordered
laboratory tests be done. The results of which led to the conclusion that
Jorge was positive for Typhoid Fever. As Dr. Rico’s shift ending, she
endorsed Jorge to Dr. Blanes.

A trial of Chloramphenicol (Chloromycetin®) sensitivity was ordered by

Dr. Blanes. As the latter doctor did not observe any adverse reaction to the
given drug, an initial dose was administered followed by a second dose 3
hours later.

An hour later, Dr. Blanes was called as the patient’s temperature rose to
41OC and experienced chills, respiratory distress, nausea, vomiting and
convulsions. Emergency measures were taken and the doctor inquired
whether Jorge had any heart problems to which he answered negative. A
second wave of convulsions occurred and the emergency measures were
not effective. Jorge went cyanotic and expired.

Leah and her children with Jorge filed a complaint against Dr. Blanes and
Dr. Rico. She alleged her husband did not die from typhoid fever but the
wrongful administration of Chloromycetin®. She also charged the clinic
and its directress for not providing adequate facilities in hiring negligent
doctors.

The petitioners offered the testimony of Dr. Vacalares, a Pathologist. He

had performed an autopsy to determine the causa mortis. His findings
showed a normal gastro-intestinal tract and testified Jorge did not die from
Typhoid but rather from shock secondary to allergic reaction or drug
overdose. An autopsy of the brain was not done.

For the respondents’ part, they offered the testimonies of Drs. Gotiong and
Panopio, an Infectious Disease Specialist and a Pathologist respectively.
Dr. Gotiong stated that intestinal hyperplasia secondary to Typhoid
infection can be microscopic and may lead to meningitis, an examination
of the brain should have been accomplished. Dr. Panopio said that Dr.
Vacalares’ autopsy incomplete.
 The RTC ruled in favor of the doctors, prompting Leah to appeal before
the CA. The CA however affirmed the decision of the RTC, hence this
petition.

Issue(s):

1) Is the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor applicable in this case?

2) Was the death of Jorge Reyes due to or caused by the negligence, lack
of skill or foresight of the defendants?
3) Is expert testimony necessary to determine whether the doctors
deviated from the standard of care in treating the patient?

Ruling:

1) NO. The doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor is restricted in situations of

malpractice cases where a layman is able to say, as a matter of
common knowledge and observation, that the consequences of
professional care were not as such as would ordinarily have followed
if due care had been exercised. The doctrine has no application in a
complaint against doctors which involves diagnosis or a scientific
treatment. The physician or surgeon is not required at his peril to
explain why any particular diagnosis was not correct, or why any
particular scientific treatment did not produce the desired result.
2) NO. Dr. Vacalares is not qualified to prove that Dr. Rico erred in his
diagnosis. On the other hand, Dr. Gotiong and Dr. Panopio were
determined as experts on the matter. They have vouched the
correctness of diagnosis. In addition, Chloramphenicol is specifically
indicated for typhoid fever. The dosages administered were within the
medically acceptable limits.
3) YES. Expert testimony is sine qua non in medical malpractice cases to
determine whether the doctors breached the standard of care. In this
case, the expert testimonies presented showed that the doctors
involved did not breach the standard of care required in treating.

WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED and the decision of the CA is

AFFIRMED.