Scribd
Upload
366 views1 page

Bernardo V Legaspi: Moreland, .J

The document summarizes a 1914 Supreme Court case between Bernardo and Legaspi regarding a car collision. The trial court found that both Bernardo and Legaspi were negligent in handling their automobiles during the collision. As such, the trial court dismissed both of their complaints against each other. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed, holding that where both the plaintiff and defendant contribute to an accident through their own negligence, neither can recover damages.

Uploaded by

AB
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
366 views1 page

Bernardo V Legaspi: Moreland, .J

The document summarizes a 1914 Supreme Court case between Bernardo and Legaspi regarding a car collision. The trial court found that both Bernardo and Legaspi were negligent in handling their automobiles during the collision. As such, the trial court dismissed both of their complaints against each other. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed, holding that where both the plaintiff and defendant contribute to an accident through their own negligence, neither can recover damages.

Uploaded by

AB
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

BERNARDO v LEGASPI

Moreland, .J.
G.R. No. L-9308. – December 23, 1914
FACTS
● Bernardo and Legaspi’s respective automobiles were involved in a collision
● Bernardo filed an action with the CFI of Manila to recover damages for injuries sustained by his car by reason of
Legaspi’s negligence in handling his automobile
● Legaspi filed a cross-complaint against Bernardo with the same court, and prayed for damages for the injuries
sustained by his car by reason of Bernardo’s negligence in handling his automobile
● The CFI of Manila dismissed both complaints on the merits
 Found upon the evidence that Bernardo and Legaspi were both negligent in handling the automobiles
 Said negligence was of such character and extent that would prevent either from recovering
● Bernardo filed an appeal from the judgment of the CFI of Manila
ISSUES/HELD/RATIO:
1. W/N the trial court erred in holding that both parties were negligent to an extent barring either of them from
recovering damages
HELD: NO
● Where the plaintiff in a negligence action, by his own carelessness contributes to the accident, and said
negligence is one of the determining causes thereof, he cannot recover
 This is equally true of the defendant
● Thus both of them, by their negligent acts, contributed to the determining cause of the accident, neither can
recover

DISPOSITIVE PORTION
The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs against the appellant.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy