Geluz vs CA

TITLE: Geluz vs CA
CITATION: 2 SCRA 801
FACTS:
Nita Villanueva, the wife of Oscar lazo, respondent, came to know Antonio Geluz, the
petitioner and physician, through her aunt Paula Yambot. Nita became pregnant some
time in 1950 before she and Oscar were legally married. As advised by her aunt and to
conceal it from her parents, she decided to have it aborted by Geluz. She had her
pregnancy aborted again on October 1953 since she found it inconvenient as she was
employed at COMELEC. After two years, on February 21, 1955, she again became
pregnant and was accompanied by her sister Purificacion and the latters daughter Lucida
at Geluz clinic at Carriedo and P. Gomez Street. Oscar at this time was in the province
of Cagayan campaigning for his election to the provincial board. He doesnt have any
idea nor given his consent on the abortion.
ISSUE: Whether husband of a woman, who voluntarily procured her abortion, could
recover damages from the physician who caused the same.
HELD:
The Supreme Court believed that the minimum award fixed at P3,000 for the death of a
person does not cover cases of an unborn fetus that is not endowed with personality
which trial court and Court of Appeals predicated.
Both trial court and CA wasnt able to find any basis for an award of moral damages
evidently because Oscars indifference to the previous abortions of Nita clearly indicates
he was unconcerned with the frustration of his parental affections. Instead of filing an
administrative or criminal case against Geluz, he turned his wifes indiscretion to
personal profit and filed a civil action for damages of which not only he but, including his
wife would be the beneficiaries. It shows that hes after obtaining a large money payment
since he sued Geluz for P50,000 damages and P3,000 attorneys fees that serves as
indemnity claim, which under the circumstances was clearly exaggerated.