Title
Soliman, Jr. vs. Tuazon
Case
G.R. No. 66207
Decision Date
May 18, 1992
A student shot by a security guard sued his school for damages. The Supreme Court ruled the school could be liable for negligence or breach of contract, remanding the case for further proceedings.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 149453)

Facts:

Maximino Soliman, Jr., represented by his judicial guardian Virginia C. Soliman, petitioner, vs. Hon. Judge Ramon Tuazon, Presiding Judge of Branch LXI, Regional Trial Court of Region III, Angeles City, and the Republic Central Colleges, represented by its President, respondents, G.R. No. 66207, May 18, 1992, Supreme Court Third Division, Feliciano, J., writing for the Court.

On March 22, 1983, petitioner filed a civil complaint for damages against private respondent Republic Central Colleges, R.L. Security Agency, Inc., and one Jimmy B. Solomon, alleging that on August 13, 1982 Solomon, while on the premises of the College performing duties as a security guard, shot petitioner in the abdomen with a .38 caliber revolver and caused injuries requiring medical confinement and several months' incapacity. The complaint alleged that Solomon acted without provocation and with intent to kill.

Private respondent Colleges moved to dismiss the complaint as to it, arguing that it had no employer-employee relationship with Solomon and thus could not be vicariously liable; it further contended that the 7th paragraph of Article 2180 of the Civil Code (liability of teachers and heads of establishments for acts of pupils, students or apprentices) did not apply because Solomon was not a pupil, student, or apprentice. In an order dated November 29, 1983, respondent Judge Ramon Tuazon granted the Colleges' motion to dismiss; petitioner moved for reconsideration which was denied.

Petitioner sought relief in the Supreme Court by a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition, alleging grave abuse of discretion by the trial judge in granting the dismissal for the Colleges and in failing to consider bases of liability other than Article 2180. The petition invoked, among other authorities, Palisoc v. Brillantes, American President Lines v. Clave, Social Security System v. Court of Appeals...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Did the respondent trial judge commit grave abuse of discretion in granting the motion to dismiss filed by Republic Central Colleges?
  • Can Republic Central Colleges be held vicariously liable under Article 2180 of the Civil Code for the alleged torts of Jimmy B. Solomon, who was employed by R.L. Security Agency, Inc.?
  • Independently of Article 2180, can Republic Central Colleges be held liable to petitioner on the basis of an implied contract or other legal oblig...(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.