Title
M.D. Transit and Taxi Co., Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. L-23882
Decision Date
Feb 17, 1968
A pedestrian hit by a bus sued for damages; the employer’s subsidiary liability was affirmed based on the driver’s criminal conviction, rendering due diligence defenses irrelevant.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-23882)

Facts:

  • Parties and capacities
    • M. D. Transit & Taxi Co., Inc. — appellant and defendant in the civil action; employer of the bus driver.
    • David Epstein — plaintiff and respondent in the civil action; injured pedestrian.
    • Dominador Sembrano — driver of the bus; defendant in the criminal action and in default in the civil case.
  • Accident and injuries
    • On August 18, 1958, at about 8:30 a.m., while crossing Taft Avenue extension near Castro Street, Manila, plaintiff was struck by a Pasay-bound bus driven by Sembrano.
    • Injuries sustained by plaintiff included fracture of the left femur and right fibula and lacerations of the scalp and occipital region.
  • Criminal proceedings against the driver
    • Sembrano was prosecuted for serious physical injuries through reckless imprudence.
    • The Court of First Instance of Manila found Sembrano guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to imprisonment (from 1 year, 8 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months).
    • The trial court refrained from adjudicating civil liability in that criminal case, plaintiff having reserved the right to file a separate civil action for damages.
    • Sembrano appealed but later withdrew the appeal, rendering the conviction final and executory on May 5, 1961.
  • Civil action for damages
    • On January 23, 1959, plaintiff filed the present civil action against Sembrano and M. D. Transit & Taxi Co., Inc..
    • Sembrano was declared in default. M. D. Transit answered, pleading due diligence in selection and supervision of employees and alleging plaintiff's negligence.
    • At trial the plaintiff introduced the criminal conviction as the first piece of evidence.
  • Trial and appellate dispositions...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Primary legal question
    • Whether the civil action is based upon liability arising from a crime (civil liability incident to a criminal conviction under Articles 102 and 103 of the Revised Penal Code) or upon liability arising from a quasi-delict.
  • Evidentiary and defense issues
    • Whether the conviction of Sembrano in the criminal case is admissible and conclusive against the employer in the subsequent civil action.
    • Whether appellant's evidence of due diligence in the selection and supervision of its employees is a valid defense when the action is predicated upon criminal liability of the employee.
    • Whether plaintiff's failure to allege Sembrano's conviction or insolvency in the civil complaint impairs his ...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.