Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    (Digest) Pelayo V Lauron

    Uploaded by

    Karla Bee
    Petitioner doctor filed a case against defendants to collect fees for assisting their daughter-in-law during childbirth. The Supreme Court ruled that since the obligation to provide support falls on the husband by law, and there was no contract, the defendants were not liable. The Court explained that the husband, not the parents-in-law, is legally obligated to pay medical expenses for his wife, including fees to the assisting doctor. As there was no agreement, the parents-in-law could not be held responsible for payment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    (Digest) Pelayo V Lauron

    Uploaded by

    Karla Bee
    1K views1 page
    Petitioner doctor filed a case against defendants to collect fees for assisting their daughter-in-law during childbirth. The Supreme Court ruled that since the obligation to provide support falls on the husband by law, and there was no contract, the defendants were not liable. The Court explained that the husband, not the parents-in-law, is legally obligated to pay medical expenses for his wife, including fees to the assisting doctor. As there was no agreement, the parents-in-law could not be held responsible for payment.

    Original Description:

    Pelayo v. Lauron

    Original Title

    (Digest) Pelayo v Lauron

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Petitioner doctor filed a case against defendants to collect fees for assisting their daughter-in-law during childbirth. The Supreme Court ruled that since the obligation to provide support falls on the husband by law, and there was no contract, the defendants were not liable. The Court explained that the husband, not the parents-in-law, is legally obligated to pay medical expenses for his wife, including fees to the assisting doctor. As there was no agreement, the parents-in-law could not be held responsible for payment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views1 page

    (Digest) Pelayo V Lauron

    Uploaded by

    Karla Bee
    Petitioner doctor filed a case against defendants to collect fees for assisting their daughter-in-law during childbirth. The Supreme Court ruled that since the obligation to provide support falls on the husband by law, and there was no contract, the defendants were not liable. The Court explained that the husband, not the parents-in-law, is legally obligated to pay medical expenses for his wife, including fees to the assisting doctor. As there was no agreement, the parents-in-law could not be held responsible for payment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    PELAYO v.

    LAURON
    G.R. No. L-4089
    January 12 1909
    Arturo
    Pelayo
    petitioners
    responden Marcelo Lauron

    Torres

    Hermosisima

    ts
    summary Petitioner doctor filed this case against the defendants to collect his

    professional fees for the childbirth of the defendants daughter-in-law.


    According to the SC, since the obligation to give support falls upon the husband
    by express provision of law, then absent any contract agreed upon, the
    defendants cannot be held liable.

    facts of the case


    -

    Pelayo, a doctor, filed a complaint on November 1906, stating that at about October of
    1906, defendants requested medical assistance from him for their daughter-in-law who
    was about to give birth. By consultation, it was agreed upon to remove the fetus as well as
    the afterbirth. He estimated his services cost around P500 which the defendants in this
    case refuse to pay.
    Defendants on the other hand denied everything and alleged as a special defense that the
    daughter-in-law died because of the childbirth, that said daughter in law was living apart
    from them ogether with her husband, and that her stay at their house on the day of
    childbirth was merely accidental.
    The lower court held for the defendants on account of lack of sufficient evidence to
    establish a right of action.
    Hence, this case before the SC. According to the SC, the only important issue to answer
    here is

    issue

    Who is bound to pay for Pelayos bill?

    Ratio
    -

    The court laid down the sequence of its reasoning. First, the court cited the general law on
    obligations under Article 1089 (obligations are created by law, by contracts, by quasicontracts, and by illicit acts and omissions or by those in which any kind og negligence
    occurs).
    By express provision of law, the rendering of medical assistance in case of illness is one of
    the mutual obligations the spouses are obliged by way of mutual support . In this case
    therefore, if the dead daughter-in-law could not pay for her childbirth expenses, then the
    burden will fall on the husband. The party bound to furnish support is therefore liable for
    all expenses, including the fees of the medical expert for his professional services.
    It is only the husband, and not his parents, who are bound to give support. The fact that it
    wasnt the husband who asked for help from Mr Pelayo is of no moment. The husband is
    still the person obliged to give support and likewise pay for the expenses of such support.
    Since there was no contract agreed upon that the defendants will pay for the expenses,
    then they are not liable. Within the meaning of the law, the father and mother-in-law are
    strangers with respect to the obligation that falls upon the husband to give support.

    You might also like