Issue:

Whether or not Ms. Bartolome is entitled for damages?

Answer:

No.

Article 2176 of the New Civil Code provides that whoever by act or omission causes damage to
another, there being fault or negligence is obliged to pay for damages done.

Article 2179 of the New Civil Code also provides when the plaintiff’s own negligence was the
proximate cause of his injury, he cannot recover damages.

Negligence, as defined by article 1173 of the New Civil Code as the omission of that diligence
which is required by the circumstance of persons, place and time.

In this case, Ms. Bartolome is not entitled for damages because her professor is not negligent in
the incident. It was stated that when Ms. Bartolome lost consciousness she was hurriedly rushed in
Makati Medical Center. Conducting recitation in a JD class is a normal way of socratic method used by
professor in a JD program to teach the students. Ms. Mondragon cannot be faulted in conducting such.
This socratic method of teaching is an everyday class routine in a JD Class. The fact that Ms. Bartolome
received harsh words and insults from the professor is not an indication of Ms. Mondragon’s wilful act
or omission, since as a JD professor she was just doing her job.

Ms. Mondragon is not negligent. Ms. Bartolome should be faulted in coming to school already
pale and weak resulting in her miscarriage, because if she is not feeling well, she shouldn’t come to class
and instead scheduled herself to see the doctor. Recitations are normal in a JD class, conducting such is
not a wilful act on the part of the professor. Since Ms. Bartolome is a third year JD student she should
expected that there is the possibility her being called in the recitation. She should earlier assessed
herself if she can handle that usual routine. Thus, in her own negligence Ms. Bartolome should be
faulted herself. She cannot now demand damages.