Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No. L-8721 May 23, 1957 TRANQUILINO CACHERO, plainti-appellant, plainti-appellant, vs. MANILA YELLO TA!ICA" CO., INC., defendantappellant. Bernardino Guerrero and J. G. Madarang for plaintiappellant. Castaño and Ampil for the defendant-appellant. #ELI!, J.$ There is no dispute as to the folloin! facts" on #ece$b #ece$ber er %&, %&, %'(), %'(), Att* Att*.. Tran+ ran+uil uilin ino o . Cache Cachero ro boar boarded ded a ello ello Taica aicab, b, ith ith plate plate No. No. )%(' )%('-() -() drive driven n b* /re!o /re!orio rio Mira Mira Abi Abinio nion n and oned oned b* the the Manila ello ello Taicab Taicab Co., 0nc. 1n passin! 1ro+uieta bete beteen en #orote #oroteo o 2ose 2ose and and 3ope 3ope de 4e!a e!a street streets, s, /re!orio Mira Abinion bu$ped said taicab a!ainst a Meralco post, No. %-56&78, ith the result that the cab as badl* badl* s$ashe s$ashed d and and the plaint plainti i fell fell out of the vehic vehicle le to the !roun !round, d, suer suerin in! ! there thereb* b* ph*si ph*sical cal in9uries, slight in nature.
The chaueur chaueur as subse+uentl* subse+uentl* prosecuted prosecuted b* the the Cit* iscal and on ebruar* ):, %':&, upon his plea of !uilt* the Municipal Court of Manila sentenced hi$ to suer % $onth and % da* of arresto mayor , and to pa* the costs. 1n #ece$ber %8, %'(), Tran+uilino . Cachero address addressed ed a letter letter to the Manila Manila ello ello Taicab aicab Co., Co., 0nc., hich as folloed b* another of 2anuar* :, %'(&, hich reads as follos" MAN03A, January 6, 1!" 1!" The MAN03A E331; E331; TA<0CAB TA<0CAB C1., C1., 0NC. %&&7 Arle!ui, Manila #ear =irs" As *ou have been alread* advised b* the letter dated #ece$ber #ece$ber %8, %'(), %'(), on #ece$ber #ece$ber %&, %'(), hile 0 as a passe passen!e n!err of *our *our taica taicab b bearin bearin! ! plate plate No. No. )%(' and driven b* *our chaueur /re!orio Mira and throu!h his ne!li!ence and the bad condition of the said car, he bu$ped the sa$e a!ainst the pave$ent on the street >1ro+uieta ? beteen #oroteo 2ose and 3ope de 4e!a streets, Manila@ and hit the Meralco post on said street, street, resultin! resultin! in the s$ashin! s$ashin! of the said taicab, and as a result thereof 0 as !ravel* in9ured and suered and is still suerin! ph*sical, $ental and $oral da$a!es and not bein! able to resu$e $* dail* callin!. or the said da$a!es, 0 hereb* $ae a de$and for the pa*$ent of the su$ of P8',)5(.:(, coverin! epenses for for tran transp spor orta tati tion on to the the hosp hospit ital al for for $edi $edica call treat$en treat$ent, t, $edicine $edicines, s, doctors doctors bills, bills, actual actual $onetar* $onetar* loss, loss, $oral, $oral, co$pensa co$pensator* tor* and ee$pl ee$plar* ar* da$a!es, da$a!es, etc., ithin ( da*s fro$ date of receipt hereof. 0 trust to hear fro$ *ou on the $atter ithin the period of ( da*s above specied. Trul* Trul* *ours, *ours, >=!d.@ TRAND030N1 . CACER1 ))(: 0nt. B, Misericordia =t., =ta. CruF, Manila
>Ehibit G@ The Taicab Co. to avoid epenses and ti$e of liti!a liti!atio tion n oere oered d to settle settle the case case a$icab a$icabl* l* ith ith plai plaint nti i but but the the latt latter er onl* onl* a!re a!reed ed to redu reduce ce his his de$and to the su$ of P8),H(H.)H as his onl* basis for settle$ent hich, of course, as not accepted b* said co$pan*. =o plainti instituted this action on ebruar* ebruar* ), %'(&, in the Court of irst 0nstance of Manila, pra*in! in the co$plaint that the defendant be conde$ned to pa* hi$" >a@ >a@ The The su$ su$ of P8), P8),H( H(H. H.)H )H,, the the tota totall su$ su$ of the the ite$iFed losses and6or da$a!es under para!raph 8 of the co$plaint, ith le!al interest thereon fro$ the date of the lin! of the co$plaintI >b@ The su$ of P(,HHH as attorne*Js feeI and the costs of the suitI and Plainti further respectfull* pra*s for such other and further reliefs reliefs as the facts and the la pertainin! to the case $a* arrant. The defendant ansered ansered the co$plaint settin! forth aKr$ative defenses and a counterclai$ for P'&H as da$a!es da$a!es and pra*in! pra*in! for the dis$issal dis$issal of plainti plaintiJs Js action. After hearin! the Court rendered decision onl* 2ul* )H, %'(5, the dispositive dispositive part of hich is as follos" 0N 40E; 1 TE 1RE/10N/, the Court hereb* renders 9ud!$ent in favor of the plainti and a!ainst the defendant, sentencin! the latter to pa* the for$er the folloin!" >%@ or $edicine, doctorJs fees for services rendered rendered and transportation, transportation, P8HHI >)@ professional fee as attorne* for the defendant in Cri$inal Case No. &:5, LPeople #s. Manolo Maddela et al.L of the Court of irst 0nstance 0nstance of Nueva Nueva 4iFca*a 4iFca*a,, P&,HHHI P&,HHHI >&@ profess professiona ionall fees as attorne* for the defendant in Civil Case No. )&7'% )&7'% of the Munic Municip ipal al Court Court of Manil Manila, a, L4ir L4ir!i !inia nia Tan!ulan Tan!ulan #s. 3eonel da =ilva,L and for the tain! of the deposition of /abina An!repan in a case a!ainst the Philippine National Ban, P)HHI and>5@ $oral da$a!es in the a$ount of P),HHH. #efendantJs counterclai$ is hereb* dis$issed. #efendant shall also pa* the costs.L ro$ this decision both parties appealed to Ds, plainti li$itin! li$itin! his appeal to the part of the decision decision hich refers to the $oral da$a!es aarded to hi$ hich he consi consider dered ed inade inade+ua +uate, te, and to the failu failure re of said said 9ud!$ent to !rant the attorne*Js attorne*Js fees ased for in the pra*er of his co$plaint. #efendant in turn alle!es that the trial Court Court erred erred in aardin! aardin! to the plainti plainti the folloin!" >%@ P8HH ? for $edicine, doctorJs fees and transportation epensesI >)@ P&,HHH ? as supposedl* unearned full professional fees as attorne* for the defendant defendant in Cri$inal Case No. &:5, LPeople #s. Manolo Maddela et al.LI >&@ P)HH ? as supposedl* unearned professional fees as attorne* for the defendant in Civil Case No. )&7'% of the Manila Manila Muni Municip cipal al Court, Court, L4ir L4ir!i !ini nia a Tan!ul an!ulan an #s. 3eonel de =ilvaL, and for failure to tae the deposition of a certain /abina An!repan in an unna$ed caseI and >5@ P),HHH P),HHH ? as $oral $oral da$a! da$a!es, es, a$oun a$ountin tin! ! to the !rand total of P(,'HH, these a$ounts bein! ver* $uch !reater than hat plainti deserves.
%
0n connection ith his appeal, plainti calls attention to the testi$onies of #r. Modesto =. Purisi$a and of #r. rancisco A!uilar, a $e$ber of the sta of the National 1rthopedic ospital, hich he considers necessar* as a basis for ascertainin! not onl* the ph*sical suerin!s under!one b* hi$, but also for deter$inin! the ade+uate co$pensation for $oral da$a!es that he should be aarded b* reason of said accident. The eact nature of plaintiJs in9uries, their de!ree of seriousness and the period of his involuntar* disabilit* can be deter$ined b* the $edical certicate >Ehibit #@ issued b* the National 1rthopedic ospital on #ece$ber %:, %'(), and the testi$onies of #r. rancisco A!uilar, ph*sician in said hospital, and of #r. Modesto Purisi$a, a private practitioner. The $edical certicate >Ehibit #@ lists" >a@ a su$lu%ation of the ri!ht shoulder 9ointI > $@ a&ontusion on the ri!ht chestI and >&@ a Lsuspicious fractureL of the upper end of the ri!ht hu$erus. #r. A!uilar ho issued the $edical certicate ad$itted, hoever, ith re!ard to the Lsuspicious fractureL, that in his opinion ith >the aid of@ the -ra* there as no fracture. Accordin! to this doctor plainti ent to the National Hrthopedic ospital at least si ti$es durin! the period fro$ #ece$ber %:, %'(), to April 8, %'(&I that he strapped plaintis bod* >see Ehibit E@, hich strap as not re$oved until after a period of si ees had elapsed #r. Modesto Purisi$a, a private practitioner, testied that he ad#ised and treated plainti fro$, #ece$ber %5, %'(), to the end of March >%'(&@. Plainti as never hospitaliFed for treat$ent of the in9uries he received in said accident. Counsel for the defendant delves +uite etensivel* on these in9uries. e sa*s in his brief the folloin!" 2ust hat is a subluation 'u%ation is another ter$ for dislocation >#orland, ;.A.N., The A$erican 0llustrated Medical #ictionar* >%&th ed.@, p. :()@, and hence, a su$la%ation is an inco$plete or partialdislo&ation >($id., p. %%%(@. ;hile a dislocation is the displace$ent of a bone or bones fro$ its or their nor$al settin! >and, therefore, applicable and occurs onl* to 9oints and not to ri!id or non-$ovable parts of the seletal s*ste$@ > ($id., p. &(7I Christopher, ., A Tetboo of =ur!er* >(th ed.@, p. &5)@, it should be distin!uished fro$ a fracture hich is a brea or rupture in a bone or cartila!e, usuall* due to eternal violence >Christopher, ., A Tetboo of =ur!er* >(th Ed.@ p. %'5I #orland, ;.A.N., The A$erican 0llustrated Medical #ictionar* >%&th ed.@, P.5('@. Because, unlie fra&ture hich $a* be partial >a crac in the bone@ or total >a co$plete brea in the bone@, there can be no half-a* situations ith re!ard to dislocations of the shoulder 9oint >the head or ball of the hu$erus ? the hu$erus is the bone fro$ the elbo to the shoulder@ $ust be either inside the socet of the scapula or shoulder blade >in hich case there is no dislocation@ or out of the latter >in hich event there is a dislocation@, to denote a condition here due to eternal violence, the $uscles and li!a$ents connectin! the hu$erus to the scapula have sub9ected to strain intense enou!h to produce te$porar* distention or lessenin! of their tautness and conse+uentl* resultin! in the loosenin! or renchin! of
the ball of the hu$erus fro$ its snu! t in the socet of the scapula, b* usin! the ter$s subluation or partial dislocation>as used in the $edical certicate@, is to fall into a $isno$er ? a ter$ often used b* LchiropractorsL and b* those ho ould ant to sound i$pressive, but !enerall* unfavored b* the $edical profession. To describe the above condition $ore aptl*, the $edical profession usuall* e$plo*s the epression lu%atio imperfe&ta, or, in si$ple lan!ua!e, a sprain >#orland, ;.A.N., The A$erican 0llustrated Medical #ictionar* >%&th ed.@, p. :()@. The condition e have described is a paraphrase of the denition of a sprain. Plainti suered this ver* in9ur* >a sprained or renched shoulder 9oint@ and a cursor* scrutin* of his -ra* plates >Ehibits A and B@ b* a +ualied orthopedic sur!eon or b* a la*$an ith a picture or ra* plate of a nor$al shoulder 9oint >found in an* standard tetboo on hu$an anato$*I the one e used as =che$er, 2.P., MorrisJ u$an Anato$* >%H ed., p. %'5@ for co$parison ill bear out our clai$. Treat$ent for a sprain is b* the use of adhesive or elastic banda!e, elevation of the 9oint, heat, eeura!e and later $assa!e >Christopher, ., A Tetboo of =ur!er* >(th ed., p. %%:@. The treat$ent !iven to the plainti as 9ust eactl* that #r. A!uilar banda!ed >strapped@ plaintiJs ri!ht shoulder and chest >t.s.n., p. &%@ in an elevated position >ith the forear$ horiFontal to the chest >see photo!raph, Ehibit E@, and certain vita$ins ere prescribed for hi$ >t.s.n., p. %&%@. e also underent $assa!e for so$e ti$e b* #rs. A!uilar and Purisi$a. The $edicines and appurtenances to treat$ent purchased b* plainti fro$ the 1rthopedic ospital, Botica Boie and Metro #ru! =tore ere, b* his on ad$ission, adhesive plaster, banda!e, !auFe, oil and Ltintura arnicaL >t.s.n., p. & ? continuation of transcript @, and #r. Purisi$a also prescribed LNu$otiFinL, a beat !eneratin! oint$ent >t.s.n., p. )&@, all of hich are indicated for a sprain, and b* their nature, can cure nothin! $ore serious than a sprain an*a*. ractures and true dislocations cannot be cured b* the ind of treat$ent and $edicines hich plainti received. A true dislocation, for instance, is treated b* $eans of reduction throu!h traction of the ar$ until the hu$eral head returns to the proper position in the scapular socet >pullin! the ar$ at a :H de!ree an!le and !uidin! the ball of the hu$erus into proper position, in its socet@ hile the patient is under deep anaesthesia, and then, co$pletel* i$$obiliFin! the part until the in9ured capsule has healed >Christopher, ., A Tetboo of =ur!er*, pp. &5& and &55@. No evidence as sub$itted that plainti ever received the latter ind of treat$ent. #r. Purisi$a even declared that after the plaintiJs rst visit to the 1rthopedic ospital the latter infor$ed hi$ that there )as no fra&ture or dislo&ation >t.s.n., p. ):@. #r. Purisi$aJs state$ent is the truth of the $atter as e have alread* eplained ? 9oints of the shoulder bein! onl* sub9ect to total dislocation >due to their anato$ical desi!n@, not to partial ones, and an* in9ur* approi$atin! dislocation but not co$pletel*, it bein! classied as $ere sprains, sli!ht or bad.
)
The second and last in9ur* plainti sustained as a &ontusion. ;hat is a contusion 0t is 9ust a hi!h Oon epression for a bruise or the act of bruisin! >#orland, ;.A.N., The A$erican 0llustrated Medical #ictionar* >%&th ed. p. )'H@. No further discussion need be $ade on this particular in9ur* since the nature of a bruise is of co$$on noled!e >itJs a bit unco$fortable but not disablin! unless it occurs on $ovable parts lie the n!ers or elbo hich is not the case, herein havin! occurred in the ri!ht chest@ and the ind of $edical treat$ent or help it is also ell non. >pp. %H-%5, defendant-appellantJs brief@. The trial 2ud!e undoubtedl* did not !ive $uch value to the testi$onies of the doctors hen in the state$ent of facts $ade in his decision he referred to the ph*sical in9uries received b* the plainti as slight in nature and the latter is estopped fro$ discussin! the sa$e in order to $ae the$ appear as serious, because in the state$ent of facts $ade in his brief as appellant , he sa*s the folloin!" The facts of the case as found b* the loer court in its decision, ith the per$ission of this onorable Court, )e respe&tfully *uote them hereunder as our +AM /0 0AC+ for the purpose of this appeal. Before enterin! into a discussion of the $erits of plaintiJs appeal, ;e ill sa* a fe ords as to the nature of the action on hich his de$and for da$a!es is predicated. The nature of an action as in contract or in tort is deter$ined fro$ the essential ele$ents of the co$plaint, taen as a hole, in the case of doubt a construction to sustain the action bein! !iven to it. ;hile the pra*er for relief or $easure of da$a!es sou!ht does not necessaril* deter$ine the character of the action, it $a* be $aterial in the deter$ination of the +uestion and therefore entitled to consideration and in case of doubt ill open deter$ine character of the action and indeed there are actions hose character is necessaril* deter$ined thereb*. >% C.2.=. %%HH@ A $ere perusal of plainti co$plaint ill sho that his action a!ainst the defendant is predicated on an alle!ed breach of contract of carria!e, i.e., the failure of the defendant to brin! hi$ Lsafel* and ithout $ishapsL to his destination, and it is to be noted that the chaueur of defendantJs taicab that plainti used hen he received the in9uries involved herein, /re!orio Mira, has not even been $ade a part* defendant to this case. Considerin!, therefore, the nature of plaintiJs action in this case, is he entitled to co$pensation for $oral da$a!es Article ))%' of the Civil Code sa*s the folloin!" ART. ))%'. Moral da$a!es $a* be recovered in the folloin! and analo!ous cases" >%@ A cri$inal oense resultin! in ph*sical in9uriesI >)@ uasi-delicts causin! ph*sical in9uriesI >&@ =eduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious actsI >5@ Adulter* or concubina!eI
>(@ 0lle!al or arbitrar* detention or arrestI >:@ 0lle!al searchI >8@ 3ibel, slander or an* other for$ of defa$ationI >7@ Malicious prosecutionI >'@ Acts $entioned in Article &H'I >%H@ Acts and actions referred to in Articles )%, ):, )8, )7, )', &H, &), &5 and &(. 1f the cases enu$erated in the 9ust +uoted Article ))%' onl* the rst to $a* have an* bearin! on the case at bar. ;e nd, hoever, ith re!ard to the rst that the defendant herein has not co$$itted in connection ith this case an* Lcri$inal oense resultin! in ph*sical in9uriesL. The one that co$$itted the oense a!ainst the plainti is /re!orio Mira, and that is h* he has been alread* prosecuted and punished therefor. Althou!h >a@ oners and $ana!ers of an establish$ent or enterprise are responsible for da$a!es caused b* their e$plo*ees in the service of the branches in hich the latter are e$plo*ed or on the occasion of their functionsI >$@ e$plo*ers are lieise liable for da$a!es caused b* their e$plo*ees and household helpers actin! ithin the scope of their assi!ned tas >Article )%7H of the Civil Code@I and >&@ e$plo*ers and corporations en!a!ed in an* ind of industr* are subsidiaril* civill* liable for felonies co$$itted b* their e$plo*ees in the dischar!e of their duties >Art. %H&, Revised Penal Code@, plainti herein does not $aintain this action under the provisions of an* of the articles of the codes 9ust $entioned and a!ainst all the persons ho $i!ht be liable for the da$a!es caused, but as a result of an ad$itted breach of contract of carria!e and a!ainst the defendant e$plo*er alone. ;e, therefore, hold that the case at bar does not co$e ithin the eception of para!raph %, Article ))%' of the Civil Code. The present co$plaint is not based either on a L+uasi delict causin! ph*sical in9uriesL >Art. ))%' par. ), of the Civil Code@. ro$ the report of the Code Co$$ission on the ne Civil Code ;e cop* the folloin!" A +uestion of no$enclature confronted the Co$$ission. After a careful deliberation, it as a!reed to use the ter$ L+uasi-delictL for those obli!ations )hi&h do not arise from la), &ontra&ts *uasi-&ontra&ts or &riminal oenses. hey are no)n in +panish legal treatises as 2&ulpa a*uiliana2, 2&ulpae%tra-&ontra&tual2 or 2&uasi-delitos2. The phrase Lculpa-etra-contractualL or its translation Letracontractual faultL as eli$inated because it did not eclude +uasi-contractual or penal obli!ations. LA+uilian faultL $i!ht have been selected, but it as thou!ht inadvisable to refer to so ancient a la as the L3e A+uiliaL. =o L+uasi-delictsL as chosen, hich $ore nearl* corresponds to the Ro$an 3a classication of obli!ations, and is in har$on* ith the nature of this ind of liabilit*. The Co$$ission also thou!ht of the possibilit* of adoptin! the ord LtortL fro$ An!lo-A$erican 3a. But LtortL under that s*ste$ is $uch broader than the =panish-Philippine concept of obli!ations arisin! fro$
&
non-contractual ne!li!ence.L LTortL in An!lo-A$erican 9urisprudence includes not onl* ne!li!ence, but also intentional cri$inal acts, such as assault and batter*, false i$prison$ent and deceit. 0n the !eneral plan of the Philippine le!al s*ste$, intentional and $alicious are !overned b* the Penal Code, althou!h certain eceptions are $ade in the Pro9ect. >Report of the Code Co$$ission, pp. %:%-%:)@. 0n the case of Cang&o #s. Manila 3ailroad , &7 Phil. 8:7, ;e established the distinction beteen obli!ation derived fro$ ne!li!ence and obli!ation as a result of a breach of a contract. Thus, ;e said" 0t is i$portant to note that the foundation of the le!al liabilit* of the defendant is the contract of carria!e, and that the obli!ation to respond for the da$a!e hich plainti has suered arises, if at all, fro$ the breach of that contract b* reason of the failure of defendant to eercise due care in its perfor$ance. That is to sa*, its lia$ility is dire&t and immediate, diering essentially in the legal #ie) point from that presumpti#e responsi$ility for the negligen&e of its ser#ants, imposed $y Arti&le 14" of the Ci#il Code >Art. )%7H of the ne@ , )hi&h &an $e re$utted $y proof of the e%er&ise of due &are in their sele&tion or super#ision. Arti&le 14" is not appli&a$le to o$ligation arising E< C1NTRACTD, $ut only to e%tra-&ontra&tual o$ligations or 5 to use the te&hni&al form of e%pression, that arti&le, relates only to CD3PA AD030ANA and not to CD3PA C1NTRACTDA3. The decisions in the cases of Castro vs. Acro Taicab >7) Phil., &(', 5: 1. /aF., Na. (, p. )H)&@I 'ilius et al. #s. Manila 3ailroad , >(' Phil. 8(7@ and others, herein $oral da$a!es, are aarded to the plaintis, are not applicable to the case at bar because said decisions ere rendered before the eectivit* of the ne Civil Code >Au!ust &H, %'(H@ and for the further reason that the co$plaints led therein ere based on dierent causes of action. 0n vie of the fore!oin! the su$ of P),HHH aarded as $oral da$a!es b* the trial Court has to be eli$inated, for under the la it is not a co$pensation aardable in a case lie the one at bar. As to plaintiJs de$and for P(,HHH as attorne*Js fees, the Civil Code provides the folloin!" ART, ))H7. 0n the absence of stipulation, attorne*Js fees and epenses of liti!ation, other than 9udicial costs, cannot be recovered, e%&ept " >%@ ;hen ee$plar* da$a!es are aardedI >)@ ;hen the defendantJs act or o$ission has co$pelled the plainti to liti!ate ith third persons or to incur epenses to protect his interestI >&@ 0n cri$inal cases of $alicious prosecution a!ainst the plaintiI >5@ 0n case of a clearl* unfounded civil action or proceedin! a!ainst the plaintiI >(@ ;here the defendant acted in !ross and evident had faith in refusin! to satisf* the plaintiJs plainl* valid, 9ust and de$andable clai$I >:@ 0n actions for le!al supportI >8@ 0n actions for the recover* of a!es of household helpers, laborers and silled orersI
>7@ in actions for inde$nit* under or$enJs co$pensation and e$plo*ers liabilit* lasI >'@ 0n a separate civil action to recover civil liabilit* arisin! fro$ a cri$eI >%H@ ;hen at least double 9udicial costs are aardedI >%%@ 0n an* other case here the court dee$s it 9ust and e+uitable that attorne*Js fees and epenses of liti!ation should be recovered. 0n all cases, the attorne*Js fees and epenses of liti!ation $ust be reasonable. The present case does not co$e under an* of eceptions enu$erated in the precedin! article, speciall* of para!raph ) thereof, because defendantJs failure to $eet its responsibilit* as not the plainti to liti!ate or to incur epenses to protect his interests. The present action as instituted because plainti an eorbitant a$ount for da$a!es >P:H,HHH@ and naturall* the defendant did not and could not *ield to such de$and. This is neither a case that co$es under para!raph %% of Article ))H7 because the 3oer Court did not dee$ it 9ust and e+uitable to aard an* a$ount for attorne*Js fees. As ;e a!ree ith the trial 2ud!e on this point, ;e cannot declare that he erred for not aardin! to plainti an* such fees in this case. Co$in! no to the appeal of the defendant, the Court, after due consideration of the evidence appearin! on record" >%@ Approves the aard of P8HH for $edicine, doctorsJ fees and transportation epensesI >)@ Reduces the aard of P&,HHH as attorne*Js fees to the su$ of P),HHH, as Manolo Maddela, defendant in Cri$inal Case No. &:5 of the Court of irst 0nstance of Nueva 4iFca*a testied that he has alread* paid to plainti part of the latterJs fees of P&,HHH, the a$ount of hich as not disclosed, thou!h it as incu$bent upon the plainti to establish ho $uch he had been paid of said feesI >&@ Approves the aard of P)HH as unearned professional fees as attorne* for the defendant in Civil Case No. )&7%'% of the Municipal Court of Manila ho$ plainti as unable to represent, and for the latterJs failure to tae the deposition of one A!ripina An!repan due to the auto$obile accident referred to in this case. Before closin! this decision ;e dee$ it convenient to +uote the folloin! passa!e of defendantJs brief as appellant" RealiFin! its obli!ation under its contract of carria!e ith the plainti, and because the facts of the case, as have been shon, $ar it as $ore proper for the Municipal Court onl*, the defendant, to avoid the epense and ti$e of liti!ation, oered to settle the case a$icabl* ith plainti, but the latter refused and insisted on his de$and for P8),H(H.)H >Ehibit G@ as the onl* basis for settle$ent, thus addin! a clearl* pett* case to the alread* overOoin! des of the onorable Me$bers of this Court. ;e ad$ire and respect at all ti$es a $an for standin! up and !htin! for his ri!hts, and hen said ri!ht consists in in9uries sustained due to a breach of a contract of carria!e ith us, s*$path* and understandin! are added thereto. But hen a person
5
starts de$andin! P8),H(H.)H for a solitar* bruise and sprain, in9uries for hich the trial court, even at its !enerous althou!h erroneous best, could onl* !rant P(,'HH, then respect and s*$path* !ive a* to so$ethin! else. 0t is ti$e to !ht, for, in our hu$ble opinion, there is nothin! $ore loathso$e nor trul* orth* of conde$nation than one ho uses his in9uries for other purposes than 9ust rectication. 0f plaintiJs clai$ is !ranted, it ould be a blessin!, not a $isfortune, to be in9ured. >p. &5-&(@ This case as instituted b* a la*er ho, as an oKcer of the courts, should be the rst in helpin! Ds in the ad$inistration of 9ustice, and after !oin! over the record of this case, e do not hesitate to sa* that the de$and of P8),H(H.)H for a subluation of the ri!ht hu$erus bone and an insi!nicant contusion in the chest, has not even the se$blance of reasonableness. As a $atter of fact, #r. A!uilar hi$self said that the ra* plates >Ehibits A, Band C@ L did not sho) anything signi&ant ecept that it shos a slight subluation of the ri!ht shoulder, and that there is a suspicious fractureL, hich ulti$atel* he ad$itted not to eist. The plainti hi$self $ust have felt e$barrassed b* his on attitude hen after receivin! defendantJs brief as appellant, he $aes in his brief as appellee the cate!orical state$ent that he #1E= N1T N1; 0N=0=T
N1R PRETEN# 0N TE 3EA=T to Collect fro$ the defendant all the da$a!es he had clai$ed in his co$plaint, but instead he is sub$ittin! his case to the sound discretion of the onorable Court for the aard of a reasonable and e+uitable da$a!es alloable b* la, to co$pensate the plainti of the suerin! and losses he had under!one and incurred of the accident oftenti$es $entioned in this brief in hich plainti as in9uredL >p. %8-%
[email protected] acnoled!$ent co$es too late, for plainti has alread* deprived the Court of Appeals of the occasion to eercise its appellate 9urisdiction over this case hich he reclessl* du$ped to this Court. ;e certainl* cannot loo ith at favor at his attitude of plainti. ;ERE1RE, the decision appealed fro$ is hereb* $odied b* reducin! the a$ount aarded as professional fees fro$ P&,HHH to P),HHH and b* eli$inatin! the $oral da$a!es of P),HHH aarded b* the 3oer Court to the plainti. =aid decision is in all other respects aKr$ed, ithout pronounce$ent as to costs. 0t is so ordered.
Beng7on, 8adilla, Montemayor, 3eyes, A., Bautista Angelo, 'a$rador, Con&ep&ion, 3eyes, J.B.'. and nden&ia, JJ., concur.
(
