Case Digest (G.R. No. 189998)
Facts:
Dr. Ninevetch Cruz v. Court of Appeals and Lydia Umali, G.R. No. 122445, November 18, 1997, Supreme Court Third Division, Francisco, J., writing for the Court. The petition arose from criminal and civil proceedings following the March 1991 death of Lydia Umali after a pre-scheduled hysterectomy performed by petitioner Dr. Ninevetch Cruz; Dr. Lina Ercillo, the attending anesthesiologist, was charged with her as co-accused at trial but acquitted by the trial court.On March 22–24, 1991 Lydia was admitted to Perpetual Help Clinic and General Hospital in San Pablo City for an operation scheduled March 23. Family witnesses described an untidy clinic, requests during surgery for relatives to buy Tagamet and type “A” blood, an exhausted oxygen tank requiring a hurried trip to another hospital for oxygen, and a post-operative deterioration that led to Lydia’s transfer to San Pablo City District Hospital where she was re-operated on and later pronounced dead on March 24, 1991. The death certificate listed “shock” and “Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC).”
An information charged petitioner and Dr. Ercillo with “reckless imprudence and negligence resulting to (sic) homicide” under Article 365, Revised Penal Code. The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of San Pablo City, in a March 4, 1994 decision, acquitted Dr. Ercillo for insufficiency of evidence but found Dr. Cruz guilty under Article 365 and sentenced her to arresto mayor (dispositive portion quoted below). The Regional Trial Court (RTC) affirmed the MTCC decision on July 26, 1994. The Court of Appeals affirmed petitioner’s conviction on October 24, 1995 and modified the judgment to direct petitioner to pay the heirs P50,000 as indemnity. Petitioner sought relief before the Supreme Court by a petition for review on certiorari (Rule 45).
At trial, prosecution pathologists testified that the immediate cause of death was hemorrhagic shock, while expert witnesses for both sides explained that intraoperative hemorrhage may result from several possible causes — operative injury to vessels, failure of ligature, loosening of sutures, or a clotting defect such as DIC; the autopsy did not reveal untied or loose cut vessels. The courts below relied on facts such a...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was petitioner’s criminal conviction for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide supported by evidence beyond reasonable doubt?
- If not, is petitioner nonetheless civilly liable to the heirs of Lydia Umali, and what dam...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)