Corliss v Manila Railroad Co.

Corliss v. Manila Railroad Co ., 27 SCRA 674

[Rai Rai] Plaintif-appellant: Preciolita Corliss Deendant-appellee: Manila Railroad Company PTF led a complaint or damages against DEF !s"and Ralp died #en te $eep e #as dri%ing collided #it one o DEF&s locomoti%es in Pampanga at midnigt er !s"and #as '( years old) an air police o te Clar* +ir Force ,ase e ad "een eaded "ac* to te ,ase e died o serio!s "!rns at te ,ase ospital •

• • •

 TC . dismissed te te complaint or damages on te gro!nds tat Ralp&s Ralp&s o#n negligence ca!sed is deat and tat tere #as no proo o Manila Railroad&s negligence tere #ere ' #itnesses or te PTF #o presented contrasting testimonies Engnis . said tat Ralp made a "rie stop /sited to rst gear0 and slo#ed o do#n #ile it approaced te crossing crossing "!t e didn&t stop te $eep de la Pa1 . $eep #as r!nning ast and didn&t stop at te railroad crossing o one #itness or DEF) Capili  e #as at te engine at te time o te misap locomoti%e #as in good condition o e "le# te siren and repeated it in compliance #it reg!lations o o locomoti%e #as r!nning "et#een '2-'3 *m4o!r e applied te "ra*es "!t $eep #as still ca!gt in te middle o te trac*s o •

•



5667E: 8as tere negligence on te part o Manila Railroad Company9 6C: o) primarily "eca!se te nding o te TC is accorded great respect #en tere is so#ing tat tere #as a rational "asis or te res!lt reaced; o#e%er) e%en i tere #as no s!c pres!mption) te nding o te 6C #o!ld still "e te same; rst tree errors assigned "y PTF are act!al in caracter o!rt error . TC relied on te strict doctrines o Mestres and Mana"at) #en te trend in recent cases as "een a de%iation rom tose strict doctrines) as e%idenced "y te case o
 Te 6C also disc!ssed disc!ssed te pattern o de%iation in 76 $!risdictions $!risdictions tat mirror mirror o!r o#n; Prosser) Prosser) in disc!ssing a (='> case "y ?; olmes) said tat e laid do#n a standard once and or all tat #o!ld re@!ire an a!tomo"ile dri%er approacing a railroad crossing #it an o"str!cted %ie# to stop) loo* and listen and i e can&t "e s!re tat a train isn&t coming) to get o!t o te car; Te "asic idea "eind tis #as to ta*e proper care to cross a railroad trac* and ta*e reasona"le preca!tions against a train . to stop or at least slo# do#n #en te %ie# is o"str!cted; ,!t > years later) tere #as anoter case: Pa*ora %s 8a"as Rail#ay) #ere it #as so#n tat since te most efecti%e stop #as on te rail#ay trac*s itsel #ic #as a position o danger) te Co!rt no# disregarded te !niorm r!le o getting o!t o te car and ten tey said tat te dri%er need not al#ays stop; ?; Carda1o said tat eAtraordinary eAtraordinary sit!ations so!ldn&t "e s!"$ected to tests or reg!lations tat are tting or te commonplace or te normal;

 Tis reiterates #at #as mentioned "y te 6C earlier in te case tat e%ery case on @!estions o negligence so!ld "e decided "ased on te pec!liar acts o te case;  Tere is no ard and ast r!le; Tere m!st "e an o"ser%ance o a degree o care) preca!tion and %igilance #ic te sit!ation demands; 5n te instant case: it #as clear tat Corliss #as s!Bciently #arned in ad%ance o te oncoming train tat it #as inc!m"ent on im to a%oid te accident) #ic consisted in stopping te %eicle "eore te crossing and allo#ing te train to mo%e on; R7<5: TC r!ling aBrmed;