Case Digest (G.R. No. L-38565)
Facts:
In The United States v. Segundo Barias, G.R. No. 7567, decided November 12, 1912, the appellee, the United States, charged appellee Segundo Barias, a motorman of Street Car No. 9 on the Pasay–Cervantes line of the Manila Electric Railroad and Light Company, with homicide resulting from reckless negligence (imprudencia temeraria). On November 2, 1911, at about 6 a.m., Barias stopped his car on Rizal Avenue (formerly Calle Cervantes) to take on passengers. He looked backward, then started the motor without looking forward to ensure the track was clear. A three-year-old child, Fermina Jose, ran in front of the car, was knocked down, dragged, and fatally crushed. Unaware of the accident, Barias ran the car to the line’s terminus; upon return he learned of the child’s death. The Court of First Instance of Manila, presided over by Judge Crossfield, found Barias guilty of imprudencia temeraria and sentenced him to one year and one month’s imprisonment in Bilibid Prison plus costs. BariCase Digest (G.R. No. L-38565)
Facts:
- Parties and Roles
- Plaintiff-Appellee: The United States of America.
- Defendant-Appellant: Segundo Barias, motorman on Street Car No. 9 of the Manila Electric Railroad and Light Company.
- Incident Details
- Date, Time and Location: November 2, 1911 at about 6 AM on Rizal Avenue (formerly Calle Cervantes) near Calle Requesen, Manila.
- Sequence of Events:
- Barias stopped his car to load passengers, looked backward to observe boarding, then started the car.
- He did not verify that the track immediately ahead was clear.
- Victim: Fermina Jose, a child aged about two or three years, crossed in front of the moving car, was knocked down, dragged under the wheels, and killed.
- Post-Accident Conduct: Barias continued to the end of the line unaware of the accident and was informed only upon his return.
- Proceedings Below
- Trial Court Finding: No substantial dispute as to facts; Barias convicted of homicide by reckless negligence (imprudencia temeraria).
- Original Sentence: One year and one month of imprisonment at Bilibid Prison, plus costs.
Issues:
- Duty and Breach
- Did the defendant fail to observe the degree of care, precaution, and vigilance required of a motorman before setting his car in motion?
- Was looking backward without first satisfying himself that the track ahead was clear a breach of that duty?
- Reckless Negligence
- Does the defendant’s omission amount to reckless negligence (imprudencia temeraria) under Philippine law?
- Was the fatal accident avoidable by the exercise of ordinary diligence demanded by the circumstances?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)