Title
Ace Haulers Corp. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 127934
Decision Date
Aug 23, 2000
A vehicular accident led to Fidel Abiva's death, prompting criminal and civil cases. The Supreme Court ruled that Ederlinda Abiva could recover damages under quasi-delict without double recovery, upheld default against Ace Haulers, and adjusted damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 127934)

Background of the Incident

The vehicular accident occurred on June 1, 1984, involving a truck owned by Ace Haulers Corporation, driven by Jesus dela Cruz, which fatally struck Fidel Abiva after a jeepney owned by Isabelito Rivera, driven by Rodolfo Parma, initially collided with Abiva on a motorcycle. The incident prompted a criminal case for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide against both drivers, alongside civil actions for damages initiated by Ederlinda Abiva, the widow of the deceased.

Legal Actions Initiated

On July 27, 1984, a criminal information was filed against the drivers. Subsequently, on March 11, 1985, Ederlinda Abiva initiated a separate civil action for damages against the drivers, the vehicle owners, and others involved in the case. She sought actual and moral damages, attorney's fees, and a writ of preliminary attachment against the defendants’ properties.

Motion to Dismiss and Trial Court's Ruling

In January 1986, Ace Haulers Corporation and Jesus dela Cruz moved to dismiss the civil action, citing the pending criminal case and the prohibition against dual civil actions under the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure. However, Ederlinda Abiva opposed the motion, asserting her right to pursue an independent civil action. The trial court dismissed her case, determining that no civil action could proceed independently of the criminal case.

Intervention of Intermediate Appellate Court

Ederlinda Abiva sought relief from the dismissal through a petition for certiorari, which resulted in the Intermediate Appellate Court reversing the trial court's decision. The Supreme Court later denied the petition of Ace Haulers Corporation and Dela Cruz for lack of sufficient grounds, thus remanding the case back to the trial court for further proceedings.

Trial Court Proceedings Post-Reconstitution

In March 1992, following a fire that destroyed records, the trial court reconstituted the case. By July 1992, the guilty verdict was rendered against both drivers in the criminal case, imposing penalties and damages to the heirs of Fidel Abiva.

Civil Trial Outcome

During the civil case trial, Ederlinda Abiva presented testimonial and documentary evidence, including her claims of actual damages stemming from her husband's death, his earnings, and related expenses. The trial court eventually ruled against Ace Haulers Corporation, affirming the plaintiff's entitlements for moral and exemplary damages, along with attorney’s fees.

Appeals and Court of Appeals Decision

The petitioner appealed the trial court ruling to the Court of Appeals, which upheld the trial court's decision except for the exemplary damages, which were deleted. The appellate court determined that Ederlinda Abiva had the right to seek damages for the death of her husband.

Legal Principles Considered

The case hinged on the legal principles governing civil liability arising

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.