Case Digest (G.R. No. 4837)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 4837)
Facts:
On October 18, 1907, Francisco Imperial, a physician residing in Virac, Catanduanes, Albay, filed a complaint against Jose Alejandre in Bato, alleging that on July 11, 1906, the defendant owed him P2,861.75 for professional medical services rendered by the plaintiff at the defendant’s request and for the latter’s benefit. The complaint alleged that the defendant repeatedly promised to pay the sum whenever demand should be made but failed to do so, and that the defendant had refused to pay the debt despite repeated requests, to the prejudice of the plaintiff. The plaintiff prayed that the court render judgment for P3,026.001/8 for capital and interest then due, plus interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date of the complaint and costs, and to include as part of the complaint a sworn itemized account of the services (marked “Exhibit A”). The defendant, after being summoned, demurred on November 29, 1907, claiming the facts did not constitute a sufficient cause of action and that the complaint was ambiguous, unintelligible, and vague; the trial court later ordered the demurrer withdrawn upon request and required the defendant to answer. On February 26, 1908, the defendant answered with general and specific denials and sought dismissal with costs. The case proceeded to trial, and the parties presented evidence and documents. On April 1, 1908, the trial court rendered judgment ordering the defendant to pay only P593.75, without a special ruling on costs. The plaintiff moved for a new trial on April 10, 1908, arguing the judgment was contrary to law and the weight of the evidence; the motion was denied. The plaintiff excepted on April 14, 1908, and intended to appeal to the Supreme Court by bill of exceptions, which was approved and forwarded together with the record.The dispute was anchored on a contract for hire of services under Article 1544 of the Civil Code, involving professional services rendered by the plaintiff as a physician to the defendant who was sick, with the contending parties agreeing that the plaintiff provided medical assistance to cure ulcers on the defendant’s left knee by making one hundred forty-six visits in Virac where both parties resided and ten visits in Bato during six months, and that no agreement had been entered into on the fees. Based on that assumption, after receiving P300 as an advance payment, the plaintiff submitted Exhibit A, showing the claimed total debt of P3,161.75 (one hundred forty-six calls in Virac, ten in Bato, and the cost of seven prescriptions), and he deducted the P300 advance to compute the claimed balance of P2,861.75. The trial court limited the controversy to whether the amounts claimed—P80 per call in Bato and P16 per call in Virac—were reasonable in the absence of a stipulated price. Finding the claimed amounts “very excessive,” the trial judge, exercising the discretion that law and established rule grant, fixed a reasonable fee of P30 per medical visit from Virac to Bato and P4 per medical visit in Virac, computed the ten visits to Bato as P300, the one hundred forty-six visits in Virac as P584, added P9.75 for medicines, deducted the P300 already paid in advance, and arrived at P593.75. The trial court affirmed that result, and on appeal, the plaintiff alleged errors but the appellate court found no legal basis to disturb the judgment.
Issues:
Whether, in the absence of an express agreement on physician’s fees, the trial court erred in fixing the reasonable compensation for the medical services rendered under Article 1544 and related provisions of the Civil Code.Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)