6. RAMOS VS CA.

FACTS:

June 17, 1985 afternoon: Erlinda Ramos, 47-year old robust woman
underwent on an operation to the stone at her gall bladder removed after being
tested that she was fit for "cholecystectomy" operation performed by Dr. Orlino
Hozaka. Dr. Hosaka charged a fee of P16,000.00, which was to include the
anesthesiologist's fee and which was to be paid after the operation. He
assured Rogelio E. Ramos, husband that he will get a good anesthesiologist who
was Dra. Perfecta Gutierrez. Erlinda's hand was held by Herminda Cruz, her sister -
in-law who was the Dean of the College of Nursing at the Capitol Medical Center
together with her husband went down with her to the operating room. Instead of
9:30 am, Dr. Hosaka arrived at about 12:15 P.M.Herminda noticing what Dra.
Perfecta Gutierrez was doing, saw the nailbed of Erlinda becoming bluish and Dr.
Hosaka called for another anesthesiologist Dr. Calderon. She went out of the
operating room to tell Rogelio that something is wrong. When she went back she saw
Erlinda in a trendelenburg position and at 3 p.m. she was taken to the Intensive Care
Unit (ICU) where she stayed for a month due to bronchospasm incurring P93,542.25
and she was since then comatosed. She suffered brain damage as a result of the
absence of oxygen in her brain for four to five minutes. She was also diagnosed to
be suffering from "diffuse cerebral parenchymal damage". Monthly expenses ranged
from P8,000 to P10,000. Spouses Ramos and their minors filed against Dr. Hosaka
and Dra. Perfecta Gutierrez. RTC: favored the Ramos' awarding P8,000 as actual
monthly expenses totalling to P632,000 as of April 15, 1992, P100,000 atty.
fees, P800,000 moral damages,P200,000 exemplary damages and cost of suit.
Respondents appealed. CA: reversed ordering the Ramos' to pay their unpaid bills
of P93,542.25 plus interest

ISSUE: W/N the Ramos' are entitled to damages


HELD: YES. CA modified in favor of petitioners, and solidarily against private
respondents the following: 1) P1,352,000 actual damages computed as of the date
of promulgation plus a monthly payment of P8,000.00 up to the time that petitioner
Erlinda Ramos expires or miraculously survives; 2) P2,000,000 moral damages, 3)
P1,500,000 temperate damages; 4) P100,000 exemplary damages
and P100,000 attorney's fees; and, 5) the costs of the suit.

The application of res ipsa loquitur in medical negligence cases presents a
question of law since it is a judicial function to determine whether a certain set of
circumstances does, as a matter of law, permit a given inference.
doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is availed by the plaintiff, the need for expert
medical testimony is dispensed with because the injury itself provides the proof of
negligence - applicable in this case
doctrine of res ipsa loquitur can have no application in a suit against a
physician or surgeon which involves the merits of a diagnosis or of a scientific
treatment
As borne by the records, respondent Dra. Gutierrez failed to properly intubate
the patient according to witness Herminda
o With her clinical background as a nurse, the Court is satisfied with her
testimony
Dra. Gutierrez' act of seeing her patient for the first time only an hour before
the scheduled operative procedure was, therefore, an act of exceptional negligence
and professional irresponsibility
Generally, to qualify as an expert witness, one must have acquired special
knowledge of the subject matter about which he or she is to testify, either by the
study of recognized authorities on the subject or by practical experience.
o Dr. Jamora, not an anesthesiologist, stated that oxygen deprivation
which led to anoxic encephalopathy was due to an unpredictable drug reaction
to the short-acting barbiturate was not accepted as expert opinion
Dr. Hosaka's negligence can be found in his failure to exercise the proper
authority in not determining if his anesthesiologist observed proper anesthesia
protocols
Dr. Hosaka had scheduled another procedure in a different hospital at the
same time as Erlinda's cholecystectomy, and was in fact over three hours late for the
latter's operation. Because of this, he had little or no time to confer with his
anesthesiologist regarding the anesthesia delivery. This indicates that he was remiss
in his professional duties towards his patient
private hospitals, hire, fire and exercise real control over their attending and
visiting "consultant" staff. While "consultants" are not, technically employees, a point
which respondent hospital asserts in denying all responsibility for the patient's
condition, the control exercised, the hiring, and the right to terminate consultants all
fulfill the important hallmarks of an employer-employee relationship, with the
exception of the payment of wages.
Art. 2199. Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to
an adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has
duly proved. Such compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory damages.
temperate damages can and should be awarded on top of actual or
compensatory damages in instances where the injury is chronic and continuing. And
because of the unique nature of such cases, no incompatibility arises when both
actual and temperate damages are provided for. The reason is that these damages
cover two distinct phases.
They should not be compelled by dire circumstances to provide substandard
care at home without the aid of professionals, for anything less would be grossly
inadequate. Under the circumstances, an award of P1,500,000.00 in temperate
damages would therefore be reasonable.
the damage done to her would not only be permanent and lasting, it would
also be permanently changing and adjusting to the physiologic changes which her
body would normally undergo through the years.
Erlinda Ramos was in her mid-forties when the incident occurred. She has
been in a comatose state for over fourteen years now
Ramos' are charged with the moral responsibility of the care of the victim.
The family's moral injury and suffering in this case is clearly a real one. Award of
P2,000,000 in moral damages would be appropriate.
Finally, by way of example, exemplary damages in the amount of
P100,000.00 are hereby awarded. Considering the length and nature
of the instant suit we are of the opinion that attorney's fees valued at
P100,000 are likewise proper