Scribd
Upload
215 views1 page

Atienza Vs Board of Medicine

The Board of Medicine denied a motion to reconsider admitting documentary evidence offered by Editha Atienza in her case against doctors who allegedly removed the wrong kidney during surgery. The evidence, consisting of X-Ray request forms noting the locations of her kidneys, was intended to prove her kidneys were in the proper positions before surgery. The Board denied the motion because it should first admit evidence to determine probative value when deciding the case. The Supreme Court affirmed, finding the evidence does not violate the best evidence rule because the inquiry regards the doctors' negligence, not kidney positions, and secondary evidence is allowed when the original cannot be produced.

Uploaded by

aldin
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
215 views1 page

Atienza Vs Board of Medicine

The Board of Medicine denied a motion to reconsider admitting documentary evidence offered by Editha Atienza in her case against doctors who allegedly removed the wrong kidney during surgery. The evidence, consisting of X-Ray request forms noting the locations of her kidneys, was intended to prove her kidneys were in the proper positions before surgery. The Board denied the motion because it should first admit evidence to determine probative value when deciding the case. The Supreme Court affirmed, finding the evidence does not violate the best evidence rule because the inquiry regards the doctors' negligence, not kidney positions, and secondary evidence is allowed when the original cannot be produced.

Uploaded by

aldin
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

11. Atienza vs Board of Medicine, et al.

G.R. No. 177407 February 9, 2011

Facts
Private respondent’s husband Romeo Sioson filed a complaint for gross
negligence and/or incompetence before the Board of Medicine for the removal
of Editha’s fully functional right kidney, instead of the left, against the doctors
who allegedly participated in the kidney operation.
Editha filed her formal offer of documentary evidence, which consisted of
certified photocopies of X-Ray request forms where interpretation of the
ultrasound results were written, for the purpose of proving that her kidneys
were both in their proper anatomical locations at the time she was operated.
The formal offer of documentary exhibits of private respondent was
admitted by the BOM. Petitioner moved for reconsideration of the Order, which
was denied on the ground that BOM should first admit the evidence being
offered so that it can determine its probative value when it decides the case,
and later on determine whether the evidence is relevant or not.

Issue
Whether the exhibits are inadmissible in evidence on the ground that it
violates the best evidence rule.

Ruling
No.
The subject of the inquiry in this case is whether the doctors are liable
for gross negligence in removing the right functioning kidney of Editha instead
of the left non-functioning kidney, not the proper anatomical locations of
Editha’s kidneys. The proper anatomical locations of Editha’s kidneys at the
time of her operation at the RMC may be established not only through the
exhibits offered in evidence.

In fact, the introduction of secondary evidence is allowed. Section 3, Rule


130 provides that when the subject of the inquiry is the contents of the
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the original document
itself, except when the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be
produced in court without bad faith on the offeror. Since the original
documents cannot be produced based on the testimony of Dr. Aquino BOM
properly admitted Editha’s formal offer of evidence, and thereafter, the BOM
shall determine the probative value thereof when it decides the case.

You might also like