Title
Professional Services, Inc. vs. Natividad
Case
G.R. No. 126297
Decision Date
Jan 31, 2007
A patient suffered complications after surgery due to gauzes left in her body, leading to her death. The Supreme Court held the surgeon and hospital liable for negligence and malpractice, absolving another doctor due to lack of evidence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 126297)

Petitioner and Respondents

• Petitioners: PSI (G.R. No. 126297), Aganas (G.R. No. 126467), Dr. Ampil (G.R. No. 127590)
• Respondents: Aganas, Dr. Fuentes, PSI, Dr. Ampil (depending on petition)

Key Dates

• April 4–11, 1984: Admission and surgery at Medical City Hospital.
• April 24, 1984: Patient discharged; later pain complaints.
• May–August 1984: U.S. treatment and return to Philippines; gauzes discovered.
• October 1984: Second surgery to repair recto‐vaginal fistula.
• November 12, 1984: Complaint for damages filed in RTC, Q.C.
• March 17, 1993: RTC decision in favor of Aganas.
• September 6, 1996: Court of Appeals decision affirming liability of PSI and Dr. Ampil, dismissing claims against Dr. Fuentes.
• January 31, 2007: Supreme Court decision under 1987 Constitution.

Applicable Law

• 1987 Philippine Constitution – provisions on right to health and due process.
• Civil Code, Art. 2176 (Quasi‐delict), Art. 2180 (Respondeat superior).
• Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur (evidentiary rule).
• Agency principles: Apparent authority/agency by estoppel, corporate negligence.
• Medical negligence standard: duty, breach, causation, injury.

Factual Background

Natividad was admitted for obstructed bowel and diagnosed with sigmoid cancer. Dr. Ampil performed anterior resection; Dr. Fuentes performed hysterectomy upon consent. Post‐op sponge count revealed two missing gauzes, announced to Dr. Ampil, but incision was closed. Patient later suffered pain; U.S. doctors found no cancer but returned to Philippines still in pain; pieces of gauze extruded, infection ensued, and a recto‐vaginal fistula developed. A second corrective surgery followed.

Issue I – Liability of Dr. Ampil for Negligence and Malpractice

Dr. Ampil’s failure to retrieve and timely disclose two intraoperative gauzes breached his duty as lead surgeon. The nurses’ report of missing sponges, his order to “continue for closure,” and the subsequent retrieval of gauzes from the surgical site constitute prima facie negligence per se. His misrepresentation of patient pain as normal post‐operative consequence aggravated the breach. Under the four elements—duty, breach, injury, and proximate cause—Dr. Ampil’s conduct directly caused further surgeries, infection, and physical injury.

Issue II – Liability of Dr. Fuentes and Res Ipsa Loquitur

The Court denied application of res ipsa loquitur against Dr. Fuentes, finding he performed his designated hysterectomy, reported his work to Dr. Ampil, and left before gauze count issues arose. Control of the surgical field lay with the “captain of the ship” (Dr. Ampil) at the time the gauzes went unaccounted. Res ipsa loquitur requires exclusive control of the instrumentality by the defendant, which was absent as to Dr. Fuentes.

Issue III – Liability of PSI for Dr. Ampil’s Negligence

  1. Vicarious Liability (Respondeat Superior)
    – Under Art. 2180, hospitals are liable for negligent acts of its staff “in the service of the branches” and must prove they exercised “all diligence of a good father of a family.” PSI failed to demonstrate such diligence in accrediting and supervising Dr. Ampil.
  2. Apparent Authority/Agency by Estoppel
    – PSI held out Drs. Ampil a

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.