Case Digest (G.R. No. 185597)
Facts:
On January 26, 1996, between 4:30 and 5:00 P.M., petitioners John E.R. Reyes (driver of Toyota Tamaraw PCL-349) and his brother Mervin Joseph Reyes entered the basement parking exit ramp of Makati Cinema Square (MCS). There, security guard Orico Doctolero, employed by Grandeur Security and Services Corporation, repeatedly signaled John to proceed and then halted him to admit oncoming cars, nearly causing a collision. When John complained, Doctolero shouted expletives, drew his service firearm, and shot John in the left leg as the latter attempted to disarm him. In rescuing John, Mervin pursued Doctolero and was shot in the stomach by another guard, Romeo Avila. Petitioners filed a damage suit in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati on January 18, 1999 against Doctolero, Avila, Grandeur (for negligent hiring and supervision), and MCS (for negligent engagement of Grandeur). Doctolero and Avila defaulted. On January 18, 1999, the RTC found Doctolero and Avila liable and awardedCase Digest (G.R. No. 185597)
Facts:
- Incident
- On January 26, 1996 at about 4:30–5:00 P.M., John E.R. Reyes drove his Toyota Tamaraw into the basement parking of Makati Cinema Square (MCS). Respondent security guard Orico Doctolero directed incoming and outgoing vehicles with conflicting signals, causing near collision. Upon complaint, Doctolero cursed at John, drew his service firearm and shot John in the left leg.
- Mervin Joseph Reyes rushed to aid his brother. Doctolero fired at Mervin but missed; Mervin pursued him into the mall where another guard, Romeo Avila, shot Mervin in the stomach.
- Procedural History
- January 1999: Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati found Doctolero and Avila liable for damages (actual, lost income, moral, exemplary, attorney’s fees). Grandeur Security & Services Corp. (Grandeur) and MCS were initially held liable; upon reconsideration (September 19, 2005), RTC dismissed complaints against Grandeur and MCS, leaving only the guards liable.
- July 25, 2008: Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed RTC’s dismissal of claims against Grandeur and MCS, holding that Grandeur had rebutted the presumption of negligence and MCS was not employer of the guards. December 5, 2008: CA denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration.
- August 2, 2017: Supreme Court denied petition for review on certiorari, affirming CA decision.
Issues:
- Whether Makati Cinema Square may be held vicariously liable for the torts of security guards under Article 2180 of the Civil Code.
- Whether Grandeur Security & Services Corp. may be held vicariously liable for the torts of its employees under Article 2180, or whether it successfully rebutted the presumption of negligence by proving diligence of a good father of a family in selection and supervision.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)