G.R. No. 31273, August 26, 1929
CORNELIO ALBA, plaintiff-appellant, vs. FORTUNATO ACUÑA and LAUREANO FRIAL, defendant-appellees.

FACTS

Cornelio Alba, the father of the deceased child Jose Rizal Alba, filed a civil action for damages against Dr. Laureano Frial and pharmacist Fortunato Acuña. The complaint alleged that Dr. Frial prescribed a substance for the child’s diarrhea, which Acuña prepared and dispensed from his drugstore. The child was administered the substance (identified as poisonous “Salicylate of Soda”) at a dosage of one teaspoonful every ten minutes from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. on July 30, 1926. The child’s condition worsened, and he died the following morning as a result of ingesting the substance. The plaintiff claimed damages amounting to P12,000. The defendants separately demurred to the reamended complaint, arguing that it failed to state a cause of action. The trial court sustained the demurrers and ordered the plaintiff to amend the complaint again, with a warning of dismissal for non-compliance. The plaintiff appealed.

ISSUE

Whether a civil action for damages arising from a felony or misdemeanor (culpa criminal) can be instituted independently and prior to the filing of a criminal action for the same act.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s order and held that a civil action for damages arising from a felony or misdemeanor may be brought independently and even before the institution of the corresponding criminal action. The Court clarified that the limitation under the procedural law (Article 111 of the Spanish Law of Criminal Procedure of 1882, applied supplementally) only suspends a separately instituted civil action if a criminal action is pending. It does not prohibit the prior filing of the civil action. The Court reasoned that to require the prior filing of the criminal action would prejudice the injured party, as the guilty party could dispose of their property to evade civil liability during the pendency of the criminal case. The civil liability arising from a crime exists independently under Article 17 of the Penal Code. Therefore, the demurrers should be overruled. The case was remanded to the trial court with instructions for the defendants to answer the reamended complaint.