Case Digest (G.R. No. L-24225)
Facts:
Honorio Lasam et al., plaintiffs and appellants, sued Frank Smith, Jr., defendant and appellant, to recover P20,000 for physical injuries sustained in an automobile accident on February 27, 1918, while being conveyed from San Fernando, La Union, to Currimao, Ilocos Norte. The defendant was the owner of a public garage and carried passengers for hire. The automobile was initially driven by a licensed chauffeur but, after San Juan, the chauffeur permitted his assistant, Remigio Bueno, who had no driver’s license, to operate the car. Plaintiffs’ witnesses testified that after crossing the Abra River at Tagudin defects developed in the steering gear, the car zigzagged for about one-half kilometer, left the road, overturned down a steep embankment, and pinned the plaintiffs; the defendant contended there was no steering defect and that excessive speed caused the swaying. Mr. Lasam suffered contusions and a “dislocated” rib; his wife, Joaquina Sanchez, sustained a compound fracture of...Case Digest (G.R. No. L-24225)
Facts:
HONORIO LASAM ET AL., husband and wife, sued FRANK SMITH, JR. for damages in an action arising from an automobile accident on February 27, 1918; the trial court awarded P1,254.10 with legal interest, and both parties appealed. The defendant operated a public garage and carried passengers for hire from San Fernando, La Union; the plaintiffs were being conveyed to Currimao when the chauffeur yielded to an unlicensed assistant, the car later zigzagged after crossing the Abra River at Tagudin, ran down an embankment and overturned, injuring Mrs. Joaquina Sanchez severely; the record shows the case was tried largely on tort theory under article 1903, but the trial court held the action contractual and applied articles 1101-1107 of the Civil Code.Issues:
- Is the defendant liable for the injuries under the contract of carriage or excused by *caso fortuito* under article 1105 of the Civil Code?
- Did the trial court err in awarding only P1,254.10 instead of the P7,832.80 claimed by the plaintiffs?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)