Title
People vs. Tayongtong
Case
G.R. No. 6897
Decision Date
Feb 15, 1912
Worker painting pole struck by automobile; court acquitted driver, citing insufficient evidence of negligence and deceased's contributory negligence as proximate cause.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 6897)

Background of the Incident

Resume was painting a telephone pole situated approximately two feet into the grass beside a well-maintained part of the highway. The automobile driven by Tayongtong, which could carry up to 35 passengers, was making its third trip and was loaded to full capacity. Witnesses provided conflicting accounts regarding the specifics of the accident, particularly the behavior of the automobile prior to the incident and the positioning of Resume at the time of the collision.

Prosecution's Evidence

The primary witness for the prosecution was Pablo Tayson, who claimed to have witnessed the accident from close proximity. Tayson testified that as Tayongtong's automobile approached, it was moving at a high speed, zigzagging across the road, and ultimately struck Resume, throwing him in the direction of the vehicle. Tayson's credibility was later questioned due to discrepancies in his testimony and the observations from the preliminary investigation, where his account was more consistent with Tayongtong's version.

Defense's Position

Tayongtong and his witnesses provided a differing narrative. He testified that he was driving at a moderate speed of 10 to 15 miles per hour and maintained full control of the vehicle. Tayongtong asserted that Resume attempted to cross the road unexpectedly to avoid dust, misjudging his timing, which ultimately led to the accident. Witnesses for the defense corroborated Tayongtong's claim that the automobile was not being driven recklessly or negligently.

Assessment of Evidence

The court highlighted that Tayson's credibility was undermined due to inconsistencies in his statements regarding how he shielded himself from the dust and how he described the vehicle's movement. Specifically, the prosecution's claims about the vehicle zigzagging and its high speed were deemed unreasonable by the court. On the other hand, the defense presented a rational account that corresponded with common

...continue reading

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