GABETO V ARANETA (1921)
G.R. No. L-15674 October 17, 1921
CONSOLACION GABETO, in her own right and as guardian ad litem of her three children, plaintiff-appellee, vs. AGATON ARANETA, defendant-appellant.
FACTS:
It appears in evidence that on August 4, 1918. Basilio Ilano and Proceso Gayetano took a carromata near Plaza Gay, in the City of Iloilo, with a view to going to a cockpit on Calle Ledesma in the same City. When the driver of the carromata had turned his horse and started in the direction indicated, the defendant, Agaton Araneta, stepped out into the street, and laying his hands on the reins, stopped the horse, at the same time protesting to the driver that he himself had called this carromata first. The driver, one Julio Pagnaya, replied to the effect that he had not heard or seen the call of Araneta, and that he had taken up the two passengers then in the carromata as the first who had offered employment. At or about the same time Pagnaya pulled on the reins of the bridle to free the horse from the control of Agaton Araneta, in order that the vehicle might pass on.
While he was thus engaged, the horse, being free from the control of the bit, became disturbed and moved forward, in doing which he pulled one of the wheels of the carromata up on the sidewalk and pushed Julio Pagnaya over. After going a few years further the side of the
carromata struck a police telephone box which was fixed to a post on the sidewalk, upon which the box came down with a crash and frightened the horse to such an extent that he set out at full speed up the street.
Meanwhile one of the passengers, to wit. Basilio Ilano, had alighted while the carromata was as yet alongside the sidewalk; but the other, Proceso Gayetano, had unfortunately retained his seat, and after the runaway horse had proceeded up the street to a point in front of the Mission Hospital, the said Gayetano jumped or fell from the rig, and in so doing received injuries from which he soon died.
DECISION OF LOWER COURTS:
1. CFI- Iloilo: awarded damages to the plaintiff in the amount of P3,000, from which judgment the defendant appealed.
ISSUE: Is Araneta liable?
RULING: No.
The evidence is convincing to the effect that, after Julio Pagnaya alighted, the horse was conducted to the curb and that an appreciable interval of time elapsed — same witnesses say several minutes — before the horse started on his career up the street.
It is therefore evident that the stopping of the rig by Agaton Araneta in the middle of the street was too remote from the accident that presently ensued to be considered the legal or proximate cause thereof. The evidence indicates that the bridle was old, and the leather of which it was made was probably so weak as to be easily broken.
According to the witnesses for the defendant, it was Julio who jerked the rein, thereby causing the bit it come out of the horse's mouth; and they say that Julio, after alighting, led the horse over to the curb, and proceeded to fix the bridle; and that in so doing the bridle was slipped entirely off, when the horse, feeling himself free from control, started to go away as previously stated.
Upon the whole we are constrained to hold that the defendant is not legally responsible for the death of Proceso Gayetano.
G.R. No. L-15674 October 17, 1921
CONSOLACION GABETO, in her own right and as guardian ad litem of her three children, plaintiff-appellee, vs. AGATON ARANETA, defendant-appellant.
FACTS:
It appears in evidence that on August 4, 1918. Basilio Ilano and Proceso Gayetano took a carromata near Plaza Gay, in the City of Iloilo, with a view to going to a cockpit on Calle Ledesma in the same City. When the driver of the carromata had turned his horse and started in the direction indicated, the defendant, Agaton Araneta, stepped out into the street, and laying his hands on the reins, stopped the horse, at the same time protesting to the driver that he himself had called this carromata first. The driver, one Julio Pagnaya, replied to the effect that he had not heard or seen the call of Araneta, and that he had taken up the two passengers then in the carromata as the first who had offered employment. At or about the same time Pagnaya pulled on the reins of the bridle to free the horse from the control of Agaton Araneta, in order that the vehicle might pass on.
While he was thus engaged, the horse, being free from the control of the bit, became disturbed and moved forward, in doing which he pulled one of the wheels of the carromata up on the sidewalk and pushed Julio Pagnaya over. After going a few years further the side of the
carromata struck a police telephone box which was fixed to a post on the sidewalk, upon which the box came down with a crash and frightened the horse to such an extent that he set out at full speed up the street.
Meanwhile one of the passengers, to wit. Basilio Ilano, had alighted while the carromata was as yet alongside the sidewalk; but the other, Proceso Gayetano, had unfortunately retained his seat, and after the runaway horse had proceeded up the street to a point in front of the Mission Hospital, the said Gayetano jumped or fell from the rig, and in so doing received injuries from which he soon died.
DECISION OF LOWER COURTS:
1. CFI- Iloilo: awarded damages to the plaintiff in the amount of P3,000, from which judgment the defendant appealed.
ISSUE: Is Araneta liable?
RULING: No.
The evidence is convincing to the effect that, after Julio Pagnaya alighted, the horse was conducted to the curb and that an appreciable interval of time elapsed — same witnesses say several minutes — before the horse started on his career up the street.
It is therefore evident that the stopping of the rig by Agaton Araneta in the middle of the street was too remote from the accident that presently ensued to be considered the legal or proximate cause thereof. The evidence indicates that the bridle was old, and the leather of which it was made was probably so weak as to be easily broken.
According to the witnesses for the defendant, it was Julio who jerked the rein, thereby causing the bit it come out of the horse's mouth; and they say that Julio, after alighting, led the horse over to the curb, and proceeded to fix the bridle; and that in so doing the bridle was slipped entirely off, when the horse, feeling himself free from control, started to go away as previously stated.
Upon the whole we are constrained to hold that the defendant is not legally responsible for the death of Proceso Gayetano.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment