Teodorico florenciano meralco s motorman was driving the company s street car along hidalgo street.
Taylor vs manila electric company digest.
We resolve the petition for review on certiorari 1 seeking to annul the decision2 and the resolution3 of the court of appeals ca.
127598 february 22 2000 manila electric company petitioner vs.
Under the law the manila electric company meralco may immediately disconnect electric service on the ground of alleged meter tampering but only if the discovery of the cause is personally witnessed and attested to by an officer of the law or by a.
Please leave your comments below if any.
Jan carlo gala respondent.
47 special first division g r.
Respondent jan carlo gala commenced employment with the petitioner meralco electric company meralco as a probationary lineman.
Torts and damages case digest.
Quisumbing vs meralco title.
Howard chan is supposed to be sleeping now but he stole some precious time to write this article digest.
My collection of case digests monday july 5 2010.
W n the elemnents of quasi delict to make manila electric railroad and light company liable no 2.
Manila electric railroad and light co.
Manila electric railroad and light co 1910 g r.
There they found some 20 30 fulminating caps scattered on the ground.
The motorman eased up but did not put the car into complete stop.
Secretary of labor leonardo quisumbing and meralco employees and workers association mewa respondents.
18 civil law torts and damages elements of quasi delict david taylor was a 15 year old boy who spent time as a cabin boy at sea.
One day they were working in the company s yard and they were.
Like us on facebook.
L 4977 16 phil.
Plaintiff ignacio del prado ran across the street to catch the car.
Digest manila electric v.
He was also able to learn some principles of mechanical engineering and mechanical drawing from.
City of manila v.
Elements of quasi delict torts and damages good father of a family torts and damages.
He was assigned at meralco s.
L 4977 march 22 1910.
A prior and remote cause cannot be made the basis of an action if such remote cause did nothing more than furnish the condition or give rise to the occasion by which the injury was made possible if there intervened between such prior or remote cause and the injury a distinct successive unrelated and efficient cause of the injury even.
Previous post david taylor vs manila electric railroad and light.
