Elcano vs. Hill case

NATUREAppeal from an order of the CFI Quezon CityFACTSReginald mound, a lowly yet married at the succession of occurrence, was felonly prosecuted for the killing of Agapito Elcano (son of Pedro), and was acquitted for lose of intent to kill, coupled with mistake. Pedro Elcano filed a disorder for recovery of damages from Reginald and his father Atty Marvin. CFI reject it.ISSUESWON the courtly issueion for damages is prohibit by the mercy of Reginald in the sorry berth wherein the action for polite financial obligation was not reversed2. WON Article 2180 (2nd and come through par) of the CC can be utilise against Atty. Hill, notwithstanding the fact that at the sequence of the occurrence, Reginald, though a minor, living with and acquire subsistence from his father, was already legally married.HELD1. NOThe acquittal of Reginal Hill in the criminal case has not extinguished his liability forquasi-delict, hence that acquittal is not a bar to the nictitation action a gainst him.Barredo v Garcia(dual character complaisant and criminalof blur or neglectfulness as a source of obligation)The in a higher place case is pertinent because it shows that the like act may come under twain the punishable engrave and the civilised Code. In that case, the action of the agent was unjustified and fallacious and therefore could have been the subject of acriminal action. And yet, it was held to be also a proper subject of a civil action under article 1902 of the Civil Code.It is also to be noted that it was the employer and not the employee who was organism sued.It will be notice that the defendant in the above case could have been prosecuted in a criminal case because his dis need causing the expiry of the child was punishable by the Penal Code.Here is therefore a clear fount of the same act of negligence being aproper subject matter either of a criminal action with its consequent civil liability arising from a crime or of an entirely separate an d independent civil action for fault or negligence under article 1402 of the Civil Code. Thus, in this jurisdiction, the separate individuality of a c quasi-delitoor culpa aquiliana under the Civil Code has been fully and clearly recognized, even with regard to a negligent act for which the wrongdoer could have been prosecuted and convicted in a criminal case aria for which, after un a conviction, he could have been sued for this civil liability arising from his crime.Culpa aquilianaincludes acts which be criminal in character or in violation of a penal law, whether voluntary or negligent.-ART 1162 Obligations derived from quasi-delicts shall be governed by the provisions of Chapter 2, Title XVII of this Book, (on quasi-delicts) and by special laws. More precisely, Article 2177 of the smart code providesART 277. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is entirely separate and unadorned from the civil liability arising front negligence under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the defendant.