Title
Supreme Court
Dela Torre vs. Imbuido
Case
G.R. No. 192973
Decision Date
Sep 29, 2014
Carmen Dela Torre died post-surgeries; husband alleged medical negligence. Courts ruled no negligence proven, upheld unpaid hospital bills.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 192973)

Relevant Dates and Applicable Constitutional Provision

• Patient’s admission: February 2, 1992  
• First operation (cesarean section): February 3, 1992  
• Second operation (exploratory laparotomy): February 12, 1992  
• Patient’s death: February 13, 1992  
• RTC decision: January 28, 2003  
• CA decision: December 15, 2009  
• Supreme Court resolution: September 29, 2014  

Applicable Law
1987 Philippine Constitution; Civil Code (medical negligence under Articles 2176 et seq.); relevant jurisprudence (Lucas v. Tuaño).

Factual Background of Medical Treatment

Carmen Castillo Dela Torre was admitted for overdue labor and pre-eclampsia. After failure of spontaneous delivery, Dr. Nestor performed a cesarean section. Postoperatively, Carmen developed abdominal pain, difficulty urinating (diagnosed as UTI), and increasing abdominal distension. Dr. Norma initially attributed this to flatulence; when symptoms persisted, she recommended—and with Carmen’s and Pedrito’s written consent—an exploratory laparotomy. Despite surgery, Carmen’s condition deteriorated, she vomited blood on February 13, and died that evening.

Contrasting Expert Findings on Cause of Death

Hospital’s death certificate cited cardio-respiratory arrest secondary to cerebrovascular accident, hypertension and chronic nephritis. Dr. Richard Patilano’s autopsy—limited by lack of aseptic protocol and failure to examine key organs—attributed death to severe peritonitis with multiple intestinal adhesions. Dr. Bienvenido Torres (PNP Crime Laboratory) testified that Patilano omitted vital organ examination, rendering his conclusion inconclusive.

Trial Court’s Findings and Award

RTC credited Dr. Patilano’s testimony, found the respondents negligent in surgical technique and postoperative care, and awarded:
• Actual damages: ₱28,759.46
• Indemnity for death: ₱50,000.00
• Moral damages: ₱50,000.00
• Exemplary damages: ₱20,000.00
• Attorney’s fees: ₱20,000.00
• Costs of suit

Court of Appeals’ Reversal and Counterclaim Award

The CA held that respondents exercised the degree of care, skill and diligence required of medical practitioners. It reversed the RTC judgment and granted the hospital’s counterclaim for unpaid bills and professional fees in the amount of ₱48,515.58.

Legal Standards for Medical Negligence

Under the Civil Code and jurisprudence, a medical negligence claim requires proof of (1) duty; (2) breach of that duty (failure to meet the standard of care exercised by reasonably prudent practitioners in similar locality and specialty); (3) injury; and (4) proximate causation. Expert testimony must establish both the deviation from standard care and causal link to the patient’s harm within reasonable medical probability.

Supreme Court’s Analysis on Expert Competency and Causation

The Suprem

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.