G.R. No. 118202 May 19, 1998
FIDEL C. CABARDO, petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS and JUANITO C. RODIL, respondents.

FACTS

On October 26, 1987, a truck-tanker owned by Consolidated Industrial Gases Incorporated (CIGI), driven by Jose Peralta and with helper/pump operator Fidel Cabardo (petitioner), met an accident on the South Luzon Expressway. Peralta claimed a Volkswagen car suddenly took his lane, forcing him to swerve left, causing the truck-tanker to veer, roll over the center island, and lie perpendicular on its right side. Moments later, during heavy rain, private respondent Juanito Rodil, driving a Toyota Corolla southbound on the inner lane, saw the disabled truck. He immediately stepped on his brakes, causing his car to swerve left, slide sideways, and crash into the underside of the truck-tanker. Rodil and his wife were injured. Petitioner Cabardo suffered a fractured left leg. A criminal case for Reckless Imprudence was filed against Rodil based on statements from Cabardo and Peralta. The Rodils also filed a civil case for damages against CIGI and Peralta (Civil Case No. SC-2559, RTC Santa Cruz, Laguna). Separately, petitioner Cabardo filed a complaint for damages against Rodil (Civil Case No. 639-M-89, RTC Malolos, Bulacan), alleging Rodil, driving recklessly and negligently, bumped the truck-tanker and hit him as he was about to put up an early warning device (EWD). Rodil denied this, contending Cabardo’s injury was sustained when the truck fell and that the action was barred by the pending Santa Cruz case. The Santa Cruz RTC found CIGI and Peralta negligent for failing to install an EWD and Rodil contributorily negligent for driving fast in heavy rain, awarding damages to the Rodils. The Malolos RTC denied Rodil’s motion to dismiss, finding no litis pendentia as the parties and causes of action differed. After trial, the Malolos RTC found Rodil guilty of recklessness, the proximate cause of Cabardo’s injuries, and awarded damages. The Court of Appeals reversed, disbelieving the testimonies of Cabardo and Peralta due to inconsistencies. Cabardo filed this petition for review.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the trial court’s decision and absolving private respondent Juanito Rodil from liability for damages to petitioner Fidel Cabardo.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and reinstated the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Malolos. The Court found the petition meritorious. Both the Santa Cruz RTC and the Malolos RTC had found private respondent Juanito Rodil guilty of negligence. The Santa Cruz court found Rodil was driving fast in heavy rain. The Malolos court specifically found Rodil reckless for driving 60-70 kph in the left lane during heavy rain with poor visibility, failing to take precautions a careful driver would take. The Supreme Court held that the inconsistencies in the testimonies of Cabardo and Peralta, pointed out by the Court of Appeals, were minor and did not affect their credibility regarding the essential fact that Rodil’s car hit Cabardo. The police blotter entry, which did not mention Cabardo being hit by Rodil’s car, was not conclusive as it was based solely on Peralta’s initial statement given while in shock. The Court also overruled Rodil’s procedural objections, treating them as mere technicalities that should not prevail over substantial justice.