ELCANO VS HILL

G.R. No. L-24803 May 26, 1977

77 SCRA 79
Facts:
Reginald Hill accidentally killed the son of Elcano. He was acquitted from the
criminal case due to the defense of minority.
Elcano filed a civil case alleging damages against Reginald and his father
from whom the latter was receiving subsistence.
Hills moved to dismiss the case on the ground that case was barred by res
adjudicata and that the father was relieved from guardianship of the
defendant through emancipation by marriage. The case was dismissed thus
this appeal.
Issue:
Whether or not the present civil action for damages is already barred by the
acquittal of Reginald.
Held:
No. The acquittal of Reginald Hill in the criminal case has not extinguished his
liability for quasi-delicts, hence the acquittal is not a bar to the instant action
against him.
Criminal negligence is in violation of the criminal law while civil negligence is a
culpa aquiliana or quasi-delict, of ancient origin, having always had its own
foundation and individuality, separate from criminal negligence. Culpa aquiliana
includes voluntary and negligent acts which may be punishable by law. It results
that the acquittal of Reginald in the criminal case has not extinguished his liability
for quasi-delict, hence the acquittal is not a bar to the instant action against him.
Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is
entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under
the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover twice for the same act or omission
of the defendant.
Likewise, emancipation does not carry with it freedom to enter into transactions or
do any act that can give rise to judicial litigation. And surely, killing someone else
invites judicial action.