Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 295 views

    Teoderico Manzanares V

    Uploaded by

    Vincent Bernardo
    Teoderico Manzanares v. People of the Philippines involved a vehicular collision between an Isuzu truck driven by petitioner Manzanares and a passenger jeepney. The collision resulted in four deaths and injuries to passengers. Families of the deceased and injured filed civil suits against the petitioners and Teodoro Basallo, the registered owner of the jeepney. The issue was whether Basallo should be presumed negligent due to contributory negligence. The court held that contributory negligence is not a defense in criminal cases involving reckless imprudence, and one cannot claim another's negligence to avoid the effects of their own negligence in causing harm.

    Copyright:

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

    Teoderico Manzanares V

    Uploaded by

    Vincent Bernardo
    295 views1 page
    Teoderico Manzanares v. People of the Philippines involved a vehicular collision between an Isuzu truck driven by petitioner Manzanares and a passenger jeepney. The collision resulted in four deaths and injuries to passengers. Families of the deceased and injured filed civil suits against the petitioners and Teodoro Basallo, the registered owner of the jeepney. The issue was whether Basallo should be presumed negligent due to contributory negligence. The court held that contributory negligence is not a defense in criminal cases involving reckless imprudence, and one cannot claim another's negligence to avoid the effects of their own negligence in causing harm.

    Original Title

    Teoderico Manzanares v

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Teoderico Manzanares v. People of the Philippines involved a vehicular collision between an Isuzu truck driven by petitioner Manzanares and a passenger jeepney. The collision resulted in four deaths and injuries to passengers. Families of the deceased and injured filed civil suits against the petitioners and Teodoro Basallo, the registered owner of the jeepney. The issue was whether Basallo should be presumed negligent due to contributory negligence. The court held that contributory negligence is not a defense in criminal cases involving reckless imprudence, and one cannot claim another's negligence to avoid the effects of their own negligence in causing harm.

    Copyright:

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

    Teoderico Manzanares V

    Uploaded by

    Vincent Bernardo
    Teoderico Manzanares v. People of the Philippines involved a vehicular collision between an Isuzu truck driven by petitioner Manzanares and a passenger jeepney. The collision resulted in four deaths and injuries to passengers. Families of the deceased and injured filed civil suits against the petitioners and Teodoro Basallo, the registered owner of the jeepney. The issue was whether Basallo should be presumed negligent due to contributory negligence. The court held that contributory negligence is not a defense in criminal cases involving reckless imprudence, and one cannot claim another's negligence to avoid the effects of their own negligence in causing harm.

    Copyright:

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

    Teoderico Manzanares v. People of the Philippinesgr nos. 153760-61 oct.

    12, 2006Facts: At
    about 2:30 o’clock in the afternoon of 13 January 1983, a vehicular collision took place along
    MacArthur Highway in Bulacan nvolving an Isuzu six-wheeler truck and a passenger jeepney.
    The Isuzu truck was owned by petitioner Manhattan Enterprises, Inc. and was then driven by
    petitioner Teodorico Manzanares. The passenger jeepney, on the other hand, was registered in
    the name of Teodoro Basallo. It was established during the trial that the passenger jeepney was
    heading southwards in the direction of Manila while the Isuzu truck was heading the opposite
    way. The incident resulted in the deaths of the driver of the passenger jeepney Jesus Basallo,
    Miguel Anas, Ferdinand Exaltacion, and Antonio Pasco. It also inflicted serious physical injuries
    to some of the passengers. The families of the deceased Ferdinand Exaltacion[2] and Miguel
    Anas[3] instituted separate civil cases for damages against petitioners Manzanares, Manhattan
    Enterprises, Inc., the latter’s managing partner, Eduardo Yang, and the operator of the
    passenger jeepney, Teodoro Basallo. The heirs of Antonio Pasco opted to file a complaint
    against petitioners Manhattan Enterprises Co. and Teodorico Manzanares. Two of those who
    sustained injuries also filed their respective complaints against petitioners and Teodoro Basallo.
    In her complaint,[6] Felicidad Tomaquin claimed that because of the incident, she would not be
    able to report to her work in a factory for more than twelve months while Cita Vicente
    demanded that she be paid her salary for the two-month period that she was unable to
    perform her job as a secretary in a law firm in Bulacan. Teodoro Basallo was sued on the basis
    of breach of contract of carriage as he was the registered owner of the passenger jeepney.
    Teodoro Basallo alleged that while he owned the passenger jeepney involved in the collision,
    the same was on lease to his brother and the jeepney’sdriver, Jesus Basallo for P100.00 a day
    thus, he did not have a contract of carriage with anyone.ISSUE: whether respondent Basallo is
    presumed negligent having contributory negligence in this case.
    Held: no. As to petitioners’ argument that Jesus Basallo should be presumed negligent because
    he was driving with an expired license and the passenger jeepney owned by hisbrother
    Teodorico did not have a franchise to operate, we hold that the same fails to convince. “The
    defense of contributory negligence does not apply in criminal cases committed through reckless
    imprudence, since one cannot allege the negligence of another to evade the effects of his own
    negligence.

    You might also like