PART 1 – 1 – LEGAL OPINION: Below is an exchange between you and a hypothetical client. Based on the information given, write (1) a brief legal opinion/advice opinion/advice specifying the relevant facts of the case, the legal problems raised by your hypothetical client, your assessment of the issues involved, and the possible courses of action that may be taken under the law; and (2) one legal document that may be used in connection with your recommended course of action. Judy Ann Sanchez has come to consult you about the possibility of her bringing a lawsuit against McBee as a result of the injuries she sustained after she fell from the food chain’s staircase. Judy Ann brought along her daughter, Mara Clarita, to the interview. Mara Clarita witnessed what happened. The following is your interview with her. Interview with Mara Clarita Sanchez, accompanied by client, Judy Ann Sanchez January 10, 2011 Q: Mara, where were you on October 18, 2010? A: I was at McBee-Metropark McBee-Metropark Branch with with my mother, Judy Ann. Ann. Q: Did you see your mother fall from the staircase? A: Yes. Q: What exactly happened? A: We have just ordered ordered some spaghetti spaghetti and sundaes. Since Since the ground ground floor was already filled with people, we decided to eat at the second floor. But when we reached the staircase, we found out that there was a birthday party upstairs and it was closed to the public. Q: So where did you eat? A: I approached a crew and asked if he could find a table for us. Q: What did he do? A: He said that the birthday birthday party was was about to end so we we can go up and eat eat there. Q: Did you go upstairs? A: Yes. My mother went went up first. Q: What happened next? A: On her way up, up, she met the McBee mascot mascot (which was was a pink bee) who was was hurrying down with another crew member. Since the mascot was so big, he hit my mother by the shoulder. Q: What happened then? A: My mother lost lost her balance. She missed missed four steps and hit her head, head, shoulders, back and buttocks on each step. Q: What did you when you saw your mother? A: I was shocked and and temporarily temporarily rendered motionless. motionless. When I realized realized what happened, I immediately rushed to my mother’s side. I told the crew to call an ambulance.
Q: What did your mother do? A: She was crying. crying. She complained complained of extreme back pain pain and could not stand up. Q: What happened next? A: The store manager manager approached us. us. She said that it would would be faster if we use use her car on the way to the hospital. Two crew members carried my mother and we brought her to the nearest hospital for treatment. When you asked Judy Ann what she has done so far with the case, she told you that she asked the management of McBee-Metropark Branch to pay her P100,000 in damages for what she suffered. Although the management paid for the hospital bills, she suffered pain and was greatly inconvenienced by the weekly physical therapy she was undergoing since the accident. When you asked about the management’s response to her demand for damages, she gave you the followi f ollowing ng letter: December 15, 2010 Judy Ann Sanchez 911 Bluewhale Street Palanan, Makati City Dear Ms. Sanchez: I am writing in reference to your letter dated November 18, 2010 addressed to Ms. Anna Batungbacal, Batungbacal, Manager of the McBee-Metropark McBee-Metropark Branch. Branch. She endorsed endorsed your letter to me as Operations Manager in charge of the McBee-Metropark Branch. We, at McBee-Metropark Branch are very sorry for any inconvenience your family may have experienced in connection with your unfortunate accident last October 18, 2010. As Ms. Batungbacal and I told you during our hospital visit on October 19, 2010, we truly understand how you and your family feel about the incident. We assure you that we will continue to shoulder all expenses related to your weekly physical therapy until such time that you are fully restored to your previous health. Our conversation helped us understand each other’s situation. I hope that with this, any past misunderstanding has been cleared up, and we can now put this unfortunate incident behind us. Please accept my sincerest apologies in behalf of the McBee-Metropark Branch team. We truly hope to see you and your family in our store again. Thank you. Very truly yours, McBee Foods Corporation
Q: What did your mother do? A: She was crying. crying. She complained complained of extreme back pain pain and could not stand up. Q: What happened next? A: The store manager manager approached us. us. She said that it would would be faster if we use use her car on the way to the hospital. Two crew members carried my mother and we brought her to the nearest hospital for treatment. When you asked Judy Ann what she has done so far with the case, she told you that she asked the management of McBee-Metropark Branch to pay her P100,000 in damages for what she suffered. Although the management paid for the hospital bills, she suffered pain and was greatly inconvenienced by the weekly physical therapy she was undergoing since the accident. When you asked about the management’s response to her demand for damages, she gave you the followi f ollowing ng letter: December 15, 2010 Judy Ann Sanchez 911 Bluewhale Street Palanan, Makati City Dear Ms. Sanchez: I am writing in reference to your letter dated November 18, 2010 addressed to Ms. Anna Batungbacal, Batungbacal, Manager of the McBee-Metropark McBee-Metropark Branch. Branch. She endorsed endorsed your letter to me as Operations Manager in charge of the McBee-Metropark Branch. We, at McBee-Metropark Branch are very sorry for any inconvenience your family may have experienced in connection with your unfortunate accident last October 18, 2010. As Ms. Batungbacal and I told you during our hospital visit on October 19, 2010, we truly understand how you and your family feel about the incident. We assure you that we will continue to shoulder all expenses related to your weekly physical therapy until such time that you are fully restored to your previous health. Our conversation helped us understand each other’s situation. I hope that with this, any past misunderstanding has been cleared up, and we can now put this unfortunate incident behind us. Please accept my sincerest apologies in behalf of the McBee-Metropark Branch team. We truly hope to see you and your family in our store again. Thank you. Very truly yours, McBee Foods Corporation
By: Ted Pallone Operations Manager – – Metro Manila (South) Area
Laws and jurisprudence that may apply 1. Article 2176 of of the Civil Code Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. 2. Article 2179 of of the Civil Code When the plaintiff's own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause of his injury, he cannot recover damages. But if his negligence was only contributory, the immediate and proximate cause of the injury being the defendant's lack of due care, the plaintiff may recover damages, but the courts shall mitigate the damages to be awarded. 3. Article 2180 of the Civil Code The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible. xxx xxx xxx The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible for damages caused by their employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are employed or on the occasion of their functions. f unctions. Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employe employees es and household helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks, even though the former are not engaged in any business or industry. xxx xxx xxx The responsibility treated of in this article shall cease when the persons herein mentioned prove that they observed all the diligence diligence of a good father f ather of a family to prevent damage. 4. Article 1170 of of the Civil Code Those who in the performance of their obligations are guilty of fraud, negligenc negligence, e, or delay, and those who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for damages. 5. Article 2202 of of the Civil Code
In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be liable for all damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could have reasonably been foreseen by the defendant. 6. Article 2203 of the Civil Code The party suffering loss or injury must exercise the diligence of a good father of a family to minimize the damages resulting from the act or omission in question. 7. Article 2214 of the Civil Code In quasi-delicts, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff shall reduce the damages that he may recover. 8. Article 2215 of the Civil Code In contracts, quasi-contracts, and quasi-delicts, the court may equitably mitigate the damages under circumstances other than the case referred to in the preceding article, as in the following instances: (1) That the plaintiff himself has contravened the terms of the contract; (2) That the plaintiff has derived some benefit as a result of the contract; (3) In cases where exemplary damages are to be awarded, that the defendant acted upon the advice of counsel; (4) That the loss would have resulted in any event; (5) That since the filing of the action, the defendant has done his best to lessen the plaintiff's loss or injury. 9. Article 2216 of the Civil Code No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated or exemplary damages, may be adjudicated. The assessment of such damages, except liquidated ones, is left to the discretion of the court, according to the circumstances of each case. 10. Article 2217 of the Civil Code Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, f right, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be recovered if they are the proximate result of the defendant's wrongful act for omission. 11. Article 2219 of the Civil Code
Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases: xxx xxx xxx (2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries; xxx xxx xxx 12. Article 2221 of the Civil Code Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. 13. Article 2229 of the Civil Code Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages. 14. Article 2231 of the Civil Code In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be granted if t he defendant acted with gross negligence. 15. Jarco Marketing Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 129792, December 21, 1999, 321 SCRA 375 An accident pertains to an unforeseen event in which no fault or negligence attaches to the defendant. It is "a fortuitous circumstance, event or happening; an event happening without any human agency, or if happening wholly or partly through human agency, an event which under the circumstances is unusual or unexpected by the person to whom it happens." On the other hand, negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. Negligence is "the failure to observe, for the protection of the interest of another person, that degree of care, precaution and vigilance which the circumstances justly demand, whereby such other person suffers injury." Accident and negligence are intrinsically contradictory; one cannot exist with the other. Accident occurs when the person concerned is exercising ordinary care, which is not caused by fault of any person and which could not have been prevented by any means suggested by common prudence. 16. Child Learning Center, Inc. v. Tagorio, G.R. No. 150920, November 25, 2005, 476 SCRA 236
The doctrine of res ipsa loquitor applies where (1) the accident was of such character as to warrant an inference that it would not have happened except for the defendant's negligence; (2) the accident must have been caused by an agency or instrumentality within the exclusive management or control of the person charged with the negligence complained of; and (3) the accident must not have been due to any voluntary action or contribution on the part of the person injured. 17. Philippine National Construction Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159270, August 22, 2005, 467 SCRA 569 The test for determining whether a person is negligent in doing an act whereby injury or damage results to the person or property of another is this: could a prudent man, in the position of the person to whom negligence is attributed, foresee harm to the person injured as a reasonable consequence of the course actually pursued? If so, the law imposes a duty on the actor to refrain from that course or to take precautions to guard against its mischievous results, and the failure to do so constitutes negligence. Reasonable foresight of harm, followed by the ignoring of the admonition born of this provision, is always necessary before negligence can be held to exist. 18. Saludaga v. Far Eastern University, G.R. No. 179337, April 30, 2008, 553 SCRA 741 In order for force majeure to be considered, respondents must show that no negligence or misconduct was committed that may have occasioned the loss. An act of God cannot be invoked to protect a person who has failed to take steps to forestall the possible adverse consequences of such a loss. One's negligence may have concurred with an act of God in producing damage and injury to another; nonetheless, showing that the immediate or proximate cause of the damage or injury was a fortuitous event would not exempt one from liability. When the effect is found to be partly the result of a person's participation - whether by active intervention, neglect or failure to act - the whole occurrence is humanized and removed from the rules applicable to acts of God. 19. Philippine National Construction Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159270, August 22, 2005, 467 SCRA 569 Contributory negligence is conduct on the part of the injured party, contributing as a legal cause to the harm he has suffered, which falls below the standard to which he is required to conform for his own protection. 20. Mangaliag v. Catubig-Pastoral, G.R. No. 143951, October 25, 2005, 474 SCRA 153 It must be remembered that moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are designed to compensate and alleviate in some way the physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded
