Case Digest (G.R. No. 72828)
Facts:
Estelita S. Monzon et al. v. Intermediate Appellate Court and Theo H. Davies & Co., Far East Ltd., G.R. No. 72828, January 31, 1989, Supreme Court Second Division, Paras, J., writing for the Court.Prior to April 8, 1967, a Piper Aztec aircraft (PI-C766) owned by Dole Philippines suffered damage to its left propeller blades after a slight landing accident; the blades were temporarily straightened by the pilot and later brought on April 8, 1967 to the maintenance shop of respondent Theo H. Davies & Co., Far East Ltd. at Manila Domestic Airport, where Davies’ chief mechanic repaired the damaged propeller by filing down the tips. On September 13, 1967, the same aircraft crashed shortly after takeoff from Dole’s airfield in Polomolok, Cotabato, when its right head aileron was lost in flight, killing six persons including the deceased Arturo Monzon and the pilot Jose Quimpo.
As heirs, petitioners (the widow and children of Arturo Monzon) sued Dole and Davies for wrongful death on December 26, 1969 before the Court of First Instance of Pasig, Rizal, alleging wanton negligence, violations of Civil Aeronautics Administration regulations, and departures from established aircraft industry practices. Dole entered into an amicable compromise with petitioners and paid One Million Pesos; Davies chose to litigate.
The trial court (Court of First Instance) rendered judgment on December 20, 1977 in favor of the plaintiffs and against Davies, awarding indemnity P12,000; loss of earning capacity P5,691,726.84; moral damages P2,250,000; exemplary damages P250,000; and attorney’s fees P100,000. After motions for reconsideration, the trial court granted petitioners’ request for interest on indemnity and loss-of-earning awards, first from December 26, 1976 at 12% (Order, July 5, 1978), and on further motion corrected the interest to run at 6% per annum from December 26, 1969 to July 28, 1974 and at 12% thereafter until paid (Order, October 13, 1978). Davies appealed to the Intermediate Appellate Court.
The Intermediate Appellate Court initially affirmed the trial court’s award in toto in a decision dated February 28, 1985 (opinion penned by Justice Porfirio V. Sison, concurred in by Justices Bidin and Veloso). Upon Davies’ motion for reconsideration, however, the Intermediate Appellate Court, without affording petitioners an opportunity to comment, issued a resolution dated August 29, 1985 that substantially reduced the awards: loss of earning capacity reduced to P2,500,000; moral damages to P350,000; exemplary damages to P50,000; left attorney’s fees...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Intermediate Appellate Court properly reduce the damages awarded by the trial court (and, in doing so, act appropriately when it entertained a motion for reconsideration without affording petitioners opportunity to comment)?
- Was the Intermediate Appellate Court correct in striking the trial court’s award of interest on compensatory damages from the da...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)