G.R. No. 126297, 126467, 127590. January 31, 2007.
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC., Petitioner, vs. NATIVIDAD and ENRIQUE AGANA, Respondents. NATIVIDAD (Substituted by her children) and ENRIQUE AGANA, Petitioners, vs. JUAN FUENTES, Respondent. MIGUEL AMPIL, Petitioner, vs. NATIVIDAD AGANA and ENRIQUE AGANA, Respondents.

FACTS

Natividad Agana underwent surgery at Medical City Hospital for cancer. Dr. Miguel Ampil performed an anterior resection, and Dr. Juan Fuentes performed a hysterectomy. The nurses’ record noted a missing sponge count, but the surgeons proceeded to close. Post-operation, Natividad suffered severe pain. Later, a piece of gauze was extracted from her vagina by Dr. Ampil. Subsequent treatment at another hospital revealed another gauze causing a recto-vaginal fistula, necessitating further surgery. Natividad and her husband filed a damages suit against the surgeons and Professional Services, Inc. (PSI), the hospital owner. Natividad later died, and her children substituted her.
The Regional Trial Court held PSI, Dr. Ampil, and Dr. Fuentes jointly and severally liable for negligence. The Court of Appeals affirmed but absolved Dr. Fuentes, finding he was not responsible for the gauze count, and held PSI and Dr. Ampil solidarily liable. PSI and Dr. Ampil appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) Whether PSI is vicariously liable for the negligence of Dr. Ampil; and (2) Whether Dr. Ampil is liable for negligence.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals with modification, holding PSI and Dr. Ampil solidarily liable. On the first issue, the Court applied the doctrine of corporate negligence and the theory of ostensible agency. PSI, as the hospital operator, had the direct duty to ensure the safety of patients within its facility. This includes implementing an effective system for surgical procedures, such as sponge counts. The failure of this system, evidenced by the nurses’ report, constituted a breach of the hospital’s own primary duty. Furthermore, PSI held Dr. Ampil out to the public as a member of its medical staff, leading patients to reasonably believe he was a hospital agent. PSI is therefore liable for its corporate negligence and under the principle of respondeat superior for the acts of its apparent agent, Dr. Ampil.
On the second issue, Dr. Ampil, as the lead surgeon, had the paramount responsibility for the patient’s welfare during the operation. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied as the gauze left inside the body was not an ordinary occurrence without negligence, and the instrumentality was under his control. His failure to heed the nurses’ report and ensure all sponges were accounted for before closure was a direct breach of his professional duty. His subsequent attempt to remove one gauze privately, without proper medical procedure, further demonstrated negligence. Thus, both PSI and Dr. Ampil were solidarily liable for the resulting damages.