Case Digest (G.R. No. 210445)
Facts:
On January 15, 1999, Nilo B. Rosit sustained a mandibular fracture in a motorcycle accident in Davao City. The following day, an X-ray at Davao Doctors Hospital (DDH) confirmed the injury and Rosit was referred to Dr. Rolando G. Gestuvo, a mandibular specialist, who on January 19, 1999 performed an open reduction and internal fixation using a metal plate and screws he manually trimmed to fit. Although smaller titanium screws were available in Manila, Dr. Gestuvo did not inform Rosit, believing Rosit could not afford them. Post‐operative X‐rays revealed that one of the screws impinged on Rosit’s molar, causing persistent pain and impaired jaw function. Dr. Gestuvo then referred Rosit to Dr. Pangan, who opined that corrective surgery was necessary and must be done in Cebu. Rosit traveled to Cebu on February 19, 1999, where Dr. Pangan removed the original hardware, replaced it with appropriate titanium materials, and extracted the injured molar and bone fragments, after which RositCase Digest (G.R. No. 210445)
Facts:
- Background
- On January 15, 1999, petitioner Nilo B. Rosit suffered a motorcycle accident resulting in a mandibular (jaw) fracture.
- He was referred to respondent Dr. Rolando G. Gestuvo, a specialist in mandibular injuries at Davao Doctors Hospital (DDH).
- Operative procedures
- On January 19, 1999, Dr. Gestuvo performed open‐reduction and internal fixation using a metal plate and screws; he sawed available screws to shorten them, knowing but not disclosing that smaller titanium screws were available in Manila. Post‐op X-rays showed proper alignment but one screw impinged on Rosit’s molar, causing pain and limited mouth movement.
- Dr. Gestuvo referred Rosit to dentist Dr. Pangan, who advised corrective surgery. On February 19, 1999, in Cebu, Dr. Pangan removed the plate, extracted the affected molar and bone fragments, and replaced them with smaller titanium plate and screws. Three days later, Rosit’s function and comfort were restored.
- Procedural history
- Rosit demanded reimbursement (₱140,000 for surgeries and travel; ₱50,000 for future removal of Dr. Pangan’s implants); Dr. Gestuvo refused. Rosit sued Dr. Gestuvo and DDH in RTC Civil Case No. 27,354-99.
- On September 14, 2004, the RTC found DDH diligent in supervising Dr. Gestuvo, held Dr. Gestuvo negligent under res ipsa loquitur, and awarded actual, moral, exemplary damages, attorney’s fees, costs.
- On January 22, 2013, the Court of Appeals deleted all monetary awards for lack of basis, refused to apply res ipsa loquitur, relied on an unauthenticated letter by Dr. Pangan; its November 7, 2013 resolution denied reconsideration. Rosit filed a Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur properly dispensed with the need for expert testimony.
- Whether Dr. Gestuvo breached his duty of informed consent by failing to disclose the availability and risks of using larger screws.
- Whether Dr. Pangan’s affidavit/letter is admissible and entitled to weight as expert evidence.
- Whether the damages awarded by the RTC (actual, moral, exemplary, attorney’s fees, costs) are supported by law and evidence.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)