Preview

torts case digest

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2493 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
torts case digest
[G.R. No. 117103. January 21, 1999]
Spouses RENATO S. ONG and FRANCIA N. ONG, Petitioners, v. COURT OF APPEALS, INLAND TRAILWAYS, INC. and PHILTRANCO SERVICE ENTERPRISE, INC.,Respondents.

FACTS:
Petitioners were paying passengers of Inland Bus (owned and operated by Inland Trailways under a Lease Agreement with Philtranco), iIt was driven by Calvin Coronel. Around 3:50 a.m. on February 9, 1987, when the Inland bus slowed down to avoid a stalled cargo truck in Tiaong, Quezon, it was bumped from the rear by another bus, owned and operated by Philtranco and driven by Apolinar Miralles. Both Petitioners sustained and suffered injuries, hence, they filed an action for damages against Inland and Philtranco.
Philtranco answered that it exercised the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of its drivers, and that the proximate cause of the accident was the negligence of either the cargo truck or the Inland bus which collided with said cargo truck. Likewise, Inland answered that it was the driver of the Philtanco bus, who was at fault according to the Police Report, and that the driver of the Inland bus exercised extraordinary diligence as testified to by its passengers. Inland and Philtranco filed cross-claims against each other. Both respondents moved to submit the case for decision without presenting further evidence.
Considering that the documents are admitted, there is no necessity of any formal written offer of evidence and, therefore, after all the foregoing, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision upon simultaneous memoranda of the parties and upon submission of complete transcripts.
Thereafter, the trial court rendered its Decision in favor of the [petitioners] absolving Inland Trailways, Inc., from any liability whatsoever, and against Philtranco Service Enterprise, Inc., ordering the latter to pay the [petitioners]: 1) P10,000.00 as actual damages for medical and miscellaneous expenses; 2) P50,000.00 as

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    S/S Cabrera Case Study

    • 217 Words
    • 1 Page

    On 2/16/16 at 9:08 P.M, Shift Supervisor Enmanuel Cabrera was notified by Transship Desk clerk Thomas Nick that an accident occurred in the Truck Yard. At 9:12 P.M, S/S Cabrera went out of the Transship cage with Desk clerk Thomas Nick as a spotter for safety purposes. Upon arrival at the scene of the accident, S/S Cabrera was met by the victim JB Hunt driver Donald Perkins. Mr. Perkins was driving JB Hunt tractor 352470 pulling trailer JBHU 264923. Mr. Perkins stated that while closing his trailer doors, he felt the tractor move like so back into him. Mr. Perkins saw that there was a covenant trailer in front of his tractor. Mr. Perkins immediately notified the Amazon TDR associate that where an incident in the Truck Yard.…

    • 217 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jamestown Bus Company

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages

    As in the case of Acosta v. Southern California Rapid Transit District 2 Cal.3d 19, 84 Cal. Rptr. 184 (1970), the plaintiff walked through a half-filled bus to find a seat as she did this, the light changed and the bus started behind another vehicle approximately 40 feet behind it. The driver knew that on the next block there contained a mid-block crosswalk for pedestrians and as he approached the crosswalk he noticed several young boys crossing so he placed his foot on the brake and let the bus coast for about 15 – 20 miles per hour. He abruptly placed the foot on the break when the car in front of him came to a sudden halt in order to avoid hitting the boys going through the crosswalk. In that sudden stop, the plaintiff and two other women were thrown forward in the bus and fell over the coin box and onto the floor placing plaintiff at the bottom. The court in this case favored the plaintiff due to the issue that the bus being a common carrier needed to have the utmost duty of care towards its passenger’s and the court had acknowledged that with the evidence given the driver of the bus had not used the utmost duty of care towards his passenger’s since the driver had knowledge of his daily route and he should have taken more precautions when he saw plaintiff standing, knowing very well the traffic was not a steady flow. As in the case of Acosta, you, the bus company, are held responsible for carrying for your passenger’s. Nicholas the driver did not have the utmost duty of care when driving before Ms. Schultz was seated, nor did he consider her age when he decided to proceed driving prior to her being safely secure in a seat. Ms. Schultz being a frequent bus rider, I’m sure encountered Nicholas the bus…

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Between Jacques Saelman and William Wuerch, plaintiffs, and Dennis Wayne Hill and Sylvia Ann Hill, defendants [2004] O.J. No. 2122 [2004] O.T.C. 440 20 R.P.R. (4th) 118 2004 CanLII 9176 131 A.C.W.S. (3d) 367 Court File No. 13526/00…

    • 9633 Words
    • 39 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In representation for Plaintiff, in writing, for recovery of damages in a potential case against “Gravel Is Us” Co. located in the State of Ohio. By these means, the following is the evaluation: According to our information, an employee of a dynamite blast company by the name of “Gravel is Us”, contracted by the State of Ohio, was negligent in failing to prevent you from entering its construction danger zone and causing severe injuries to you.The gravel company claims, that the street warning sign that they had previously; put up was sufficient enough to prevent harm, but are not denying their employees negligent actions.…

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Civil Litigation Unit 3

    • 581 Words
    • 3 Pages

    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS JUSTIN WILLIAM KING, ) ) Plaintiff. ) ) ) v. ) ) ANHEUSER-BUSCH COMPANIES, INC. ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) COMPLAINT Comes Now the plaintiff, Justin King, by and through his attorney, states as follows: PARTIES AND JURISDICTION 1. Plaintiff, for all times mentioned herein, was and is a resident of Cook County, State of Illinois. 2. Defendant is a corporation with its principal place of business in Missouri and carries on business in Illinois. 3. This court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims presented in this complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 because plaintiff is a resident of Illinois and the defendant is a citizen of Missouri and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of fees and costs. 4. Personal jurisdiction and venue are proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because the acts of defendant caused harm to plaintiff in Cook County, in United States Court for the Northern District of Illinois. COUNT I: ________ 5. On or about April 8, 2011, plaintiff Justin King, while in the exercise of due care, was operating his motorcycle on Interstate 57, heading in a south direction, in the City of Paxton, Illinois. 6. On the occasion in question, defendant, Frank Cuellar, a resident of Illinois, was operating a truck owned by Anheuser-Busch as its agent, and was traveling in a south direction on Interstate 57, so called, a public highway in the City of Paxton, Illinois. 7. On the occasion in question, plaintiff Justin King was traveling south on Interstate 57 in Paxton, IL on his motorcycle when he noticed a truck with Anheuser-Busch logo traveling behind him headed in the same direction. The plaintiff noticed Mr. Cuellar flashing his headlights requesting to pass the plaintiff and proceeded to switch lanes. Justin King then changed lanes to the right hand lane…

    • 581 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Case brief

    • 593 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Issues: 1) Whether the district court erred in concluding that hay is not a “product “for purposes of a strict liability in tort cause of action. 2) Whether the District Court erred in concluding that the Rothings negligence claim against Kallestad fails because it was unforeseeable that the hay could cause injury and death to the Rothings’ horses, thus no duty of care existed. 3) Whether the District Court erred in concluding that the Rothings’ breach of contract claim against Kallestad fails because it was unforeseeable that the hay could cause injury and death to the Rothings’ horses. 4) Whether the District Court erred in imposing discovery sanctions against the Rothings. 5) Whether the District Court erred in awarding attorney’s fees to Kallestad and denying the Rothings a hearing in respect to the calculation of attorney’s fees. (₱3-7)…

    • 593 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Torts 1 Outline Pittman

    • 27721 Words
    • 111 Pages

    1. Facts: P’s husband killed working on a boat owned by D b/c of D’s negligence.…

    • 27721 Words
    • 111 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Geringer V

    • 459 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The case came in front of the court on action of defendants for decision against the verdict, for fresh trial pursuant based on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure's Rule 59, and for revised decision. The judges revisited a ruling on 28th September 1988, against defendants, as a result of the injuries which took place at Wildhorn Ranch Resort in a boating accident. Keeping in view many of issues which were raised in the post-trial actions of the defendants, before and during the trial, court made a revised decision. Moreover, the court also reviewed the actions of the defendants both individually and collectively, based on which it concluded that there is no need of neither a new nor an amended judgment of the trial against the verdict (Pollack, 2011).…

    • 459 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    This loss involves a wrongful death action of a 16 year old male passenger on the insured’s open air double decker bus in Los Angeles CA. The claimant was attending his friend’s party, where the friends’ parents (Schlossberg),…

    • 606 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    THIS CAUSE having come on to be heard before the Court upon the Wife’s Complaint for Divorce, and the Husband’s Counter Complaint for Divorce, and the Court having scheduled a Final Hearing for June 17, 2012, and the parties and their respective counsel having appeared before the Court on said date, and the parties having established residency during the Final Hearing, and the Court being otherwise fully advised the premises finds that:…

    • 1143 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Torts Outline

    • 1819 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Battery is the (1) intentional infliction of (2) a harmful or offensive (3) contact. Offensive includes acts damaging to a “reasonable sense of dignity.” No knowledge of contact is required. (Rationale: protection of personal integrity. Freedom from intentional and unpermitted contact. Offensive harm included b/c of mental injuries).…

    • 1819 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Various plaintiffs sued Mitsubishi Motors Corporation after a sport utility vehicle rolled over while driven on a freeway. The trial court entered an order granting the defense a motion to disqualify plaintiff’s legal team and experts. The California Court of Appeal affirmed its decision and plaintiffs sought review.…

    • 584 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Firstly, the 'but for' test is to be applied, in which the courts ask: 'but for the defendant's action, would the damage have occurred?' The courts have accepted that drivers automatically owes a duty of care to every other road user , including pedestrians. Jack's standards have fallen below that of a reasonable person as him not paying attention to the road resulted in an injured Vera. The court will assess whether the negligent act was the most likely cause of the claimant's injuries, based on the balance of probabilities. There is an over 50% chance that Jack's negligence was the cause therefore it is to be treated as the 100% factual cause, meaning this specific injury i.e. the broken leg is actionable.…

    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    The bus companies sent written reports from drivers who are getting upheld, this issue was impacting on their route times so this information was crucial.…

    • 1619 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    FACTS: Petitioner initiated a complaint against Elizabeth Catu and Antonio Pastor who were occupying one of the units in a building in Malate which was owned by the former. The said complaint was filed in the Lupong Tagapamayapa of Barangay 723, Zone 79 of the 5th District of Manila where respondent was the punong barangay. The parties, having been summoned for conciliation proceedings and failing to arrive at an amicable settlement, were issued by the respondent a certification for the filing of the appropriate action in court. Petitioner, thus, filed a complaint for ejectment against Elizabeth and Pastor in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila where respondent entered his appearance as counsel for the defendants. Because of this, petitioner filed the instant administrative complaint against the respondent on the ground that he committed an act of impropriety as a lawyer and as a public officer when he stood as counsel for the defendants despite the fact that he presided over the conciliation proceedings between the litigants as punong barangay. In his defense, respondent claimed that as punong barangay, he performed his task without bias and that he acceded to Elizabeth’s request to handle the case for free as she was financially distressed. The complaint was then referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) where after evaluation, they found sufficient ground to discipline respondent. According to them, respondent violated Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and, as an elective official, the prohibition under Section 7(b) (2) of RA 6713. Consequently, for the violation of the latter prohibition, respondent committed a breach of Canon 1. Consequently, for the violation of the latter prohibition, respondent was then recommended suspension from the practice of law for one month with a stern warning that the commission of the same or similar act will be dealt with more severely.…

    • 875 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays