G.R. No. L-10073, L-10074, L-10075 | December 24, 1915
BUTARO YAMADA, KENJIRO KARABAYASHI, and TAKUTARU UYEHARA, plaintiffs-appellees, vs. THE MANILA RAILROAD CO., defendant, and BACHRACH GARAGE & TAXICAB CO., defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
On January 2, 1913, the plaintiffs hired an automobile from the Bachrach Garage & Taxicab Co. for a trip to Cavite Viejo. The vehicle was driven by a chauffeur supplied by the company. During the return trip, while crossing the railroad tracks of The Manila Railroad Co. in San Juan, Cavite Viejo, the automobile was struck by a train, injuring the plaintiffs. The trial court dismissed the complaint against the railroad company, finding it not liable. However, it held the taxicab company liable for damages, finding that its driver was grossly negligent. The court found that the driver approached the crossing at a fast speed without slackening, did not take precautions to look or listen for an approaching train despite an obstructed view, and that this negligence was the proximate cause of the accident. The taxicab company appealed.

ISSUE:
1. Whether the driver of the taxicab was negligent.
2. Whether such negligence, if any, is imputable to the passengers (plaintiffs).
3. Whether the damages awarded by the trial court were proper.

RULING:
1. On the driver’s negligence: The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s finding of gross negligence. The driver failed to exercise ordinary care and prudence required when crossing a railroad track, especially given that the view was obstructed. He did not reduce speed, lessen noise, or use his faculties to ascertain the approach of a train. The Court rejected the appellant’s defense of a customary practice among drivers to cross tracks without precautions, holding that a dangerous practice cannot ripen into a protective custom.

2. On imputation of negligence to passengers: The Court rejected the appellant’s contention that the passengers’ negligence was imputable to them. The passengers had no control over the vehicle or its driver; they were mere passengers who hired the vehicle with its driver. The driver was the agent and employee of the taxicab company, and his negligence is attributable to his employer, not to the passengers who had no duty to supervise his driving.

3. On the award of damages: The Supreme Court modified the damages awarded, finding the trial court’s awards excessive and not fully supported by the evidence.
Butaro Yamada: Award reduced. He was entitled to compensation for loss of wages (2 months at P100/month = P200), hospital bill (P49), and a doctor’s bill (P50), totaling P299.
Takutaru Uyehara: Award modified. He was entitled to loss of wages (3 months at P200/month = P600) and hospital/medical expenses (P350), totaling P950.
* Kenjiro Karabayashi: Award significantly reduced. His claims for extensive medical and medicine expenses were not substantiated by credible evidence. He was awarded only P400 for loss of wages for two and a half months.

The Supreme Court affirmed the liability of Bachrach Garage & Taxicab Co. but modified the monetary awards as stated. The dismissal of the case against The Manila Railroad Co. was also affirmed.