Cuadra v. Monfort

 Cuadra v. Monfort, 

35 SCRA 160 

1970

DOCTRINE:

The underlying basis of the liability imposed by Article 2176 is the fault or

negligence accompanying the act or the omission, there being no willfulness or intent to

cause damage thereby. When the act or omission is that of one person for whom

another is responsible, the latter then becomes himself liable under Article 2180, in the

different cases enumerated therein, such as that of the father or the mother under the

circumstances above quoted. The basis of this vicarious, although primary, liability is, as

in Article 2176, fault or negligence, which is presumed from that which accompanied the

causative act or omission. The presumption is merely prima facie and may therefore be

rebutted. This is the clear and logical inference that may be drawn from the last

paragraph of Article 2180, which states "that the responsibility treated of in this Article

shall cease when the persons herein mentioned prove that they observed all the

diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage."

FACTS:

Maria Teresa Cuadra, 12, and Maria Teresa Monfort, 13, were classmates in

Grade Six at the Mabini Elementary School in Bacolod City. While tasked to weed the

grass in the school premises, Maria Teresa Monfort found a plastic headband. Jokingly

she said aloud that she had found an earthworm and, evidently to frighten the Cuadra

girl, tossed the object at her. At that precise moment the latter turned around to face her

friend, and the object hit her right eye. Smarting from the pain, she rubbed the injured

part and treated it with some powder. The next day, July 10, the eye became swollen

and it was then that the girl related the incident to her parents, who thereupon took her

to a doctor for treatment. She underwent surgical operation twice, first on July 20 and

again on August 4, 1962, and stayed in the hospital for a total of twenty-three days, for

all of which the parents spent the sum of P1,703.75. Despite the medical efforts,

however, Maria Teresa Cuadra completely lost the sight of her right eye.

ISSUES:

Whether Alfonso Monfort can be held liable for damages for the act of his minor

child

HELD:

No, Alfonso Monfort, as parent, is not liable for damages.

When the act or omission is that of one person for whom another is responsible,

the latter then becomes himself liable under Article 2180, in the different cases

enumerated therein, such as that of the father or the mother. The basis of this vicarious,

although primary, liability is, as in Article 2176, fault or negligence, which is presumed

from that which accompanied the causative act or omission. The presumption is

merely prima facie and may therefore be rebutted. This is the clear and logical inference

that may be drawn from the last paragraph of Article 2180, which states "that the

responsibility treated of in this Article shall cease when the persons herein mentioned

prove that they observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to prevent

damage."

In the present case there is nothing from which it may be inferred that the

defendant could have prevented the damage by the observance of due care, or that he

was in any way remiss in the exercise of his parental authority in failing to foresee such

damage, or the act which caused it. And as far as the act which caused the injury was

concerned, it was an innocent prank not unusual among children at play and which no

parent, however careful, would have any special reason to anticipate much less guard

against.