G.R. No. 203302 - Maliksi vs. Commission on Elections

On April 21, 1991, at around 1:45 p.m., a vehicular accident involving a dump truck, a jeepney, and a car occurred along Ortigas Avenue, Pasig City.
The accident resulted in damage to a 45-foot wooden electricity post, three 75 KVA transformers, and other electrical attachments belonging to Manila Electric Company (Meralco).
Meralco identified the dump truck with plate number PAK-874, registered under Vicente Josefa's name, as the vehicle that hit the electricity post.

Meralco demanded reimbursement from Josefa for the replacement cost via letter dated April 19, 1993; Josefa refused to pay.
On September 28, 1993, Meralco filed suit against Josefa and Pablo Manojo Bautista (truck driver) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City, seeking indemnification amounting to P384,846.00, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs.

Meralco alleged Bautista’s reckless driving caused the accident and imputed primary liability on Josefa for negligent selection and supervision of Bautista.
Josefa denied employing Bautista at the time of the accident and claimed to have exercised due diligence in hiring and supervising employees. He counterclaimed for attorney’s fees due to alleged baseless complaint.
Meralco amended the complaint to correct the driver's name and later dropped Bautista for failure to serve summons.

Juan Fernandez (Meralco’s senior legal investigator) testified about investigation and information from SPO2 Alexander Galang regarding Josefa’s ownership of the truck.
Elmer Albio, the jeepney driver, recounted the sequence leading to the truck hitting the post.
Other police officers and Meralco personnel testified on the accident and damage repair.

Documentary evidence including investigation reports, police blotter, and accounting memoranda indicating damages were introduced.
Some supporting documents later admitted, though several underlying evidentiary documents, such as supplementary time sheets and trip tickets, were not presented.

Josefa filed a demurrer to evidence, which the RTC denied.
Josefa was unable to present his evidence-in-chief due to delays; the RTC declared the case submitted for decision without his evidence.

The RTC dismissed Meralco’s complaint, holding that Meralco failed to prove that the truck hit the electricity post.
The court found certain testimonies hearsay and gave no probative value to the police blotter entry due to timing.
The RTC also denied the claim for actual damages due to lack of evidentiary support.

The CA reversed the RTC, noting the parties’ pre-trial stipulation that the truck was involved in the accident affecting the post.
The CA found Bautista was Josefa’s employee, holding Josefa vicariously liable for Bautista's negligence.
The CA ruled Josefa failed to prove the exercise of due diligence in selection and supervision.
The CA awarded Meralco actual damages, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and double costs.
Josefa’s motion for reconsideration was denied.

Josefa challenged the factual findings of the CA, particularly the incident causing damage and the claim for actual damages and attorney’s fees.
Meralco argued the CA ruling was correct, citing employer's vicarious liability per Civil Code Articles 2176 and 2180.
The issues outlined included whether the truck hit the post, Bautista’s negligence, employment relationship, Josefa’s due diligence, and entitlement to damages and fees.

Whether the truck with plate number PAK-874 hit the electricity post.
Whether Pablo Manojo Bautista exercised due diligence in driving the truck.
Whether Vicente Josefa is vicariously liable for Bautista’s negligence under paragraph 5, Article 2180 of the Civil Code, including:

Existence of an employer-employee relationship between Bautista and Josefa;
Whether Josefa exercised diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of Bautista.

Whether Meralco is entitled to actual damages, attorney’s fees, and expenses of litigation.