Title
Cuyegkeng vs. Cruz
Case
G.R. No. L-16263
Decision Date
Jul 26, 1960
A **quo warranto** case arose in 1959 as doctors challenged Dr. Cruz’s Board appointment, claiming it violated Section 13 of RA 2382. The Supreme Court upheld the appointment, ruling the PMA’s list was suggestatory and petitioners lacked standing.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-16263)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Procedural Background
    • On November 25, 1959, petitioners Drs. Jose Cuyegkeng, Pedro N. Mayuga, Benjamin Roa, Timoteo Alday, Dominador Jacinto, Alejandro Gaerlan and Rosita Rivera-Ramirez filed a quo warranto petition against Dr. Pedro M. Cruz, member of the Board of Medical Examiners, praying:
      • To declare petitioners duly qualified for appointment and Cruz’s appointment null and void.
      • To issue a preliminary injunction barring Cruz from performing board duties (examinations scheduled December 14, 1959).
    • On December 3, 1959, the Supreme Court denied the ex parte preliminary injunction.
  • Submission of List and Appointment
    • Pursuant to Section 13, Republic Act No. 2382 (The Medical Act of 1959), the Executive Council of the Philippine Medical Association submitted on October 16, 1959 a confidential list of twelve “recommendees” for board membership.
    • By letter dated November 18, 1959, the Assistant Executive Secretary informed the Council the President would appoint Drs. Cesar Filoteo, Oscar Chacon, Edgardo Caparas, Jose Cocjin, Antonio Guytingco and Pedro M. Cruz as the six board members. Only the first five appeared on the submitted list; Cruz’s name was not included.
  • Parties’ Contentions
    • Petitioners and intervenors (Executive Council): Section 13’s requirement that the President appoint “from the confidential list” is mandatory; Cruz’s appointment is void.
    • Respondent Cruz:
      • The list is merely recommendatory and not binding on the President.
      • Three petitioners are statutorily unqualified under Section 14 RA 2382.
      • Section 15 authorizes reappointment of an incumbent, even if not named on the list.
      • Petitioners lack cause of action—they do not claim entitlement to Cruz’s specific office.

Issues:

  • Is Section 13 of Republic Act No. 2382 mandatory (binding on the President) or directory (recommendatory)?
  • Was the appointment of Dr. Pedro M. Cruz to the Board of Medical Examiners valid?
  • Do petitioners and intervenors have a cause of action in quo warranto against Cruz?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.