Case Digest (G.R. No. 5418) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In S.D. Martinez and his Wife, Carmen Ong de Martinez vs. William van Buskirk, decided December 27, 1910, the plaintiffs were S.D. Martinez and his wife, Carmen Ong de Martinez, and the defendant was William van Buskirk. On September 11, 1908, Carmen was riding in a carromata along Calle Real in Ermita, Manila, when a delivery wagon owned by Van Buskirk and drawn by two horses approached at high speed from the opposite direction. Observing the danger, Carmen’s cochero pulled close to the sidewalk and stopped to let the delivery wagon pass, but the wagon instead ran into the carromata, overturning it and inflicting a severe head wound on Carmen, as well as damaging the vehicle and harness. At trial, the defendant showed that his cochero was experienced, that the horses were gentle and tractable, and that in order to unload forage at Paco Livery Stable the driver had tied the reins to the front of the wagon and stepped inside to unload, leaving the Case Digest (G.R. No. 5418) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Accident circumstances
- On September 11, 1908, Carmen Ong de Martinez was riding in a carromata along Calle Real, Ermita, Manila.
- A delivery wagon owned by William Van Buskirk, drawn by two horses and driven by his cochero, approached at high speed in the opposite direction, collided with the carromata, overturned it, seriously injuring the plaintiff and damaging the vehicle and harness.
- Defendant’s evidence
- The cochero was an experienced, reliable servant; the wagon had been sent to deliver forage at Paco Livery Stable on Calle Herran.
- For unloading, the cochero tied the reins to the wagon’s front, went inside to carry fodder out, when another vehicle’s whip‐crack frightened the horses, causing them to run away and ultimately collide with the carromata.
- Trial court findings and lower court judgment
- The trial court found the defendant negligent under Civil Code Arts. 1902–1903 and awarded the plaintiffs ₱442.50 with 6% interest from October 17, 1908, plus costs.
- The defendant appealed the negligence finding and damage award.
Issues:
- Whether the cochero was negligent in leaving the horses unattended while unloading fodder.
- Whether an employer is liable under Civil Code Arts. 1902–1903 for the negligent acts of a servant who exercised due diligence.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)