Facts:

The case is Cornelio Alba v. Fortunato Acuna and Laureano Frial, decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on August 26, 1929 (G.R. No. 31273). The case arose from an appeal by Cornelio Alba, the plaintiff and appellant, against an order issued by the Court of First Instance of Capiz on May 3, 1928. The court had sustained the demurrers filed by the defendants, Fortunato Acuna (a pharmacist) and Dr. Laureano Frial (a physician), against Alba's reamended complaint, compelling him to amend it once again within a designated period, with notice that failure to do so would result in the automatic dismissal of his complaint.

Alba's complaint stemmed from the death of his son, Jose Rizal Alba y Aguiling, on July 31, 1926. Prior to his death, the child had been treated for diarrhea by Dr. Frial, who prescribed a medication that was prepared by Acuna. The medication, however, was identified as "Salicylate of Soda," a substance that turned out to be poisonous, and

...

Facts:

Background of the Case

• Cornelio Alba, acting as the plaintiff and appellant, appealed an order from the Court of First Instance of Capiz dated May 3, 1928.
• The order had sustained demurrers filed by the defendants and directed the plaintiff to amend his reamended complaint within a prescribed period, with the warning that failure to do so would result in dismissal ipso facto.
• The defendants in the case are Fortunato Acuna, a practising pharmacist and owner of a drug store (Botica Filipino), and Dr. Laureano Frial, a practising physician in Capiz.

Allegations in the Reamended Complaint

• The reamended complaint, filed on October 11, 1927, alleges that both plaintiffs and defendants are residents of Capiz and provides background on their respective statuses.
• It states that the plaintiffs are the parents of a child, Jose Rizal Alba y Aguiling, who was in good health until an illness (diarrhea) struck on and before July 30, 1926.
• On July 30, 1926, the child was administered a medicinal substance prepared at Botica Filipino and prescribed by Dr. Frial, at the rate of one teaspoonful every ten minutes, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon.
• Instead of the child improving, his condition worsened and he died the following morning.
• The complaint further alleges that the medicine administered was “Salicylate of soda,” a poisonous substance, and that the dose prescribed, being more than sufficient to kill an adult, contributed to the death through imprudence or negligence.

Nature and Extent of the Claims

• The reamended complaint seeks indemnity for damages amounting to twelve thousand pesos (P12,000), claiming that the negligent acts of the defendants caused the death of the child.
• The petition also implies a claim based on the civil liability that automatically attaches to a person criminally liable for a felony or misdemeanor.

Procedural and Legal Questions Raised

• The defendants raised demurrers on the ground that the facts alleged in the complaint did not constitute a bona fide cause of action against them.
• Defendants also argued that the reamended complaint was substantially similar to the earlier amended complaint, which had already been demurred upon, thereby suffering from the same defects.
• A significant procedural issue is presented regarding whether damages arising from a felony or misdemeanor can be pursued through a civil action concurrently or even prior to the filing of a criminal action.
• The complaint and demurrers invoked specific provisions of the Penal Code (e.g., Articles 17, 1092, 123) and the Law of Criminal Procedure (e.g., Articles 111, 112, 114, 115, 117), leading to a discussion on the proper sequence and interrelation of criminal and civil prosecutions.

Issue:

Sufficiency of the Complaint

• Whether the reamended complaint, which contends that a poisonous substance caused the death of the child through negligent or imprudent acts, adequately establishes a cause of action against the defendants.

Appropriateness and Timing of Demurrers

• Whether the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrers filed by the defendants on the grounds that the reamended complaint suffers from defects identical to those of the earlier amended complaint.

Interplay Between Civil and Criminal Actions

• Whether the civil action for indemnity, arising from acts constituting a felony or misdemeanor, may be instituted before the commencement or resolution of the corresponding criminal action.
• The related issue of whether the institution of the criminal action automatically suspends the civil suit pending a final judgment in the criminal case.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)