Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 210 views

    RUIZ vs. UCOL

    Uploaded by

    Joy Galarosa Alegre
    1. Agustina Tagaca, a laundrywoman for Atty. Jesus Ruiz, filed an administrative complaint against midwife Encarnacion Ucol. Ucol claimed that Ruiz instigated the complaint in retaliation for a case Ucol's husband filed against Ruiz. 2. Ruiz then filed a criminal libel case against Ucol based on her response. The court acquitted Ucol, finding her not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Ruiz then filed a separate civil damages case based on the same facts. 3. The issue is whether the civil case is barred by the result of the criminal libel case. The court dismissed both Ruiz's appeal and Ucol's petition, finding the civil

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    RUIZ vs. UCOL

    Uploaded by

    Joy Galarosa Alegre
    210 views1 page
    1. Agustina Tagaca, a laundrywoman for Atty. Jesus Ruiz, filed an administrative complaint against midwife Encarnacion Ucol. Ucol claimed that Ruiz instigated the complaint in retaliation for a case Ucol's husband filed against Ruiz. 2. Ruiz then filed a criminal libel case against Ucol based on her response. The court acquitted Ucol, finding her not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Ruiz then filed a separate civil damages case based on the same facts. 3. The issue is whether the civil case is barred by the result of the criminal libel case. The court dismissed both Ruiz's appeal and Ucol's petition, finding the civil

    Original Title

    (17) RUIZ vs. UCOL

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Agustina Tagaca, a laundrywoman for Atty. Jesus Ruiz, filed an administrative complaint against midwife Encarnacion Ucol. Ucol claimed that Ruiz instigated the complaint in retaliation for a case Ucol's husband filed against Ruiz. 2. Ruiz then filed a criminal libel case against Ucol based on her response. The court acquitted Ucol, finding her not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Ruiz then filed a separate civil damages case based on the same facts. 3. The issue is whether the civil case is barred by the result of the criminal libel case. The court dismissed both Ruiz's appeal and Ucol's petition, finding the civil

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    210 views1 page

    RUIZ vs. UCOL

    Uploaded by

    Joy Galarosa Alegre
    1. Agustina Tagaca, a laundrywoman for Atty. Jesus Ruiz, filed an administrative complaint against midwife Encarnacion Ucol. Ucol claimed that Ruiz instigated the complaint in retaliation for a case Ucol's husband filed against Ruiz. 2. Ruiz then filed a criminal libel case against Ucol based on her response. The court acquitted Ucol, finding her not guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Ruiz then filed a separate civil damages case based on the same facts. 3. The issue is whether the civil case is barred by the result of the criminal libel case. The court dismissed both Ruiz's appeal and Ucol's petition, finding the civil

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    G.R. No. L-45404 August 7, 1987 G. JESUS B. RUIZ, petitioner, vs.

    ENCARNACION UCOL and THE COURT OF APPEALS, respondents. FACTS: Agustina Tagaca, laundrywoman for plaintiff-appellant Atty. Jesus B. Ruiz filed an administrative charge against defendant-appellee Encarnacion Ucol, a midwife in the health center of Sarratt Ilocos Norte. In her answer to the charges, Ucol alleged that Tagaca was merely used as a tool by Atty. Ruiz who wanted to get back at the Ucol's because of a case filed by Encarnacion Ucol's husband against Ruiz. She was also alleged to have made remarks that Atty. Ruiz instigated the complaint and fabricated the charges. Accused has every reason to believe that Atty. Ruiz was the author who concocted the charges in the administrative complaint and had his laundry-woman, complainant Agustina Tagaca, sign it. Agustina has very little education and could hardly speak English, yet the administrative complaint was written in polished English, and who else but Atty. Ruiz could have authored those phrases in the complaint: "The retention of Mrs. Ucol in this government service is inimical to the good intentions of the Department to serve humanity and a disgrace and liability to present administration." The administrative case was dismissed. Ruiz decided to file his own criminal complaint for libel against Ucol based on the alleged libelous portion of Ucol's answer. Upon arraignment, Ucol entered a plea of not guilty. During the proceedings in the libel case, complainant Atty. Ruiz entered his appearance and participated as private prosecutor. After trial, the lower court rendered judgment acquitting Ucol on the ground that her guilt was not established beyond reasonable doubt. No pronouncement was made by the trial court as to the civil liability of the accused. Instead of appealing the civil aspects of the case, Ruiz filed a separate complaint for damages based on the same facts upon which the libel case was founded. Ucol filed a motion to dismiss stating that the action had prescribed and that the cause of action was barred by the decision in the criminal case for libel. Defendantappellee Ucol on the other hand filed an "appeal by certiorari" before this Court questioning the dissenting opinion of the Court of Appeals. Ucol prays for a ruling "that the respondent Court of Appeals committed a grave abuse of discretion in not dismissing the present case but instead in ordering the same remanded to the lower court for further proceedings ISSUE: the only issue being whether or not the civil action for damages was already barred by the criminal case of libel. HELD: WHEREFORE, the appeal filed by appellant Jesus B. Ruiz is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The petition filed by petitioner Encarnacion Ucol is likewise DISMISSED for patent lack of merit.

    You might also like