G.R. No. L-14092; April 29, 1960
SOLEDAD A. VERZOSA, petitioner, vs. AUGUSTO BAYTAN, ARMANDO ZACARIAS, ROSALIO RETENER, HORACIO CUSTODIO, ADORACION CUSTODIO, FELIX ANGELES, ALEJANDRO BELLEZA, SIMEON JACINTO, PAULA JACINTO and DOMINADOR MAGBANUA, respondents.

FACTS

In 1953, petitioner Soledad A. Verzosa was a public service operator of passenger buses under the name “Try-V-Tran.” On September 4, 1953, the respondents boarded one of her buses in Olongapo, Zambales, bound for Manila. Upon reaching Malolos, Bulacan, the bus collided with a freight truck, causing injuries to the respondents, loss of personal belongings, and loss of income during their treatment. The bus driver, Silvino Manglicmot, was charged criminally for reckless imprudence. The respondents filed a civil complaint in the Court of First Instance of Manila against Verzosa and Manglicmot, praying for various damages: (a) P2,500 for medical expenses; (b) P3,896.68 for lost income; (c) P1,691 for lost personal belongings; (d) P150,000 (P15,000 each) for moral damages; (e) P18,000 for attorney’s fees; and (f) P25,000 for exemplary damages. Only Verzosa answered, alleging her driver exercised due diligence and that the collision was due to the negligence of the freight truck driver. The trial court rendered judgment ordering the defendants to pay the plaintiffs: (a) P2,500 for medical expenses; (b) P3,896.68 for lost income; (c) P1,691 for lost belongings; (d) P30,000 for moral damages; and (e) P5,000 for attorney’s fees. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision but reduced the moral damages to P10,000. Verzosa filed this petition for review, contesting the awards for moral damages and attorney’s fees.

ISSUE

Whether the awards for moral damages and attorney’s fees are in accordance with law.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court modified the decision of the Court of Appeals.
1. On Moral Damages: The award of moral damages is deleted. The present action is based on a quasi-delict causing physical injuries. While Article 2219(2) of the Civil Code allows recovery of moral damages in such cases, the Court, citing Cachero vs. Manila Yellow Taxicab, held that moral damages are not recoverable in quasi-delicts unless the defendant acted with gross negligence amounting to bad faith, or where the defendant is guilty of a violation of contract in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner. The petitioner was sued and held liable merely for the negligence of her driver under Articles 1755, 1756, 1757, and 1759 of the Civil Code (common carrier’s liability). There was no finding of gross negligence or bad faith. Respondents’ reliance on Articles 21 and 1170 of the Civil Code is misplaced, as Article 2219 is the specific and controlling provision for moral damages.
2. On Attorney’s Fees: The award of attorney’s fees is reduced from P5,000 to P1,000. The Court found that the respondents’ letter of demand did not specify a sum but asked for “reasonable damages,” and the petitioner’s counsel denied liability outright. Considering that the aggregate award for actual and compensatory damages is a little over P8,000, and pursuant to Article 2208 of the Civil Code requiring attorney’s fees to be reasonable, the reduction is justified.
The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed in all other respects.