1. Case Summary On April 11, 1984, an anterior resection surgery of the colon and hysterectomy was perfomed on Natividad Agana at the Medical City Hospital after she was diagnosed to have cancer at the sigmoid region. Dr. Miguel Ampil perfomed the colon resection and closed the wound, while Dr. Juan Fuentes performed the emergency hysterectomy.

2. Case Summary Natividad complained of excruciating pains a few days later but her doctors told her that the pain was the natural consequence of the surgery. She sought medical consult in the US, and was found to be free of cancer and advised to go home. Natividad continued to suffer from pains and two weeks later, her daughter found a piece of gauze protruding from her vagina.

3. Case Summary The gauze was extracted by Dr. Fuentes, who assured Natividad that the pains would soon vanish. However, the pains remained persistent, so she sought treatment at the Polymedic General Hospital. Another gauze that badly infected her vaginal vault was found, so she had surgery to remedy the damage from her recto-vaginal fistula.

4. Case Summary On November 12, 1984, Natividad and her husband filed a complaint for damages against the Professional Services, Inc. (PSI), owner of the Medical City Hospital, Dr. Ampil, and Dr. Fuentes. Enrique Agana also also filed with the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) an administrative complaint for gross negligence and malpractice against the two doctors. On February 16, 1986, pending the outcome of the above cases, Natividad died and was duly substituted by her children.

5. Case Summary On March 17, 1993, the RTC rendered its Decision in favor of the Aganas, finding PSI, Dr. Ampil and Dr. Fuentes liable for negligence and malpractice. PSI, Dr. Fuentes and Dr. Ampil interposed an appeal to the Court of Appeals. On April 3, 1993, the Aganas filed with the RTC a motion for a partial execution of its Decision, which was granted in an Order dated May 11, 1993.

6. Case Summary The Aganas entered into an agreement with PSI and Dr. Fuentes to indefinitely suspend any further execution of the RTC Decision. However, not long thereafter, the Aganas again filed a motion for an alias writ of execution against the properties of PSI and Dr. Fuentes. Dr. Fuentes filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the Court of Appeals.

7. Case Summary On January 23, 1995, the PRC Board of Medicine dismissed the case against Dr. Fuentes. On September 6, 1996, the Court of Appeals, also dismissed the case against Dr. Fuentes, while Dr. Ampil and PSI were found liable for the damages to the Aganas. Only Dr. Ampil filed a motion for reconsideration, but it was denied.

8. Case Summary The instant consolidated petitions: – PSI contends that Dr. Ampil is not its employee, but a mere consultant or independent contractor. As such, he alone should answer for his negligence. – The Aganas maintain that the Court of Appeals erred in finding that Dr. Fuentes is not guilty of negligence or medical malpractice. – Dr. Ampil asserts that the Court of Appeals erred in finding him liable for negligence and malpractice because there was no evidence that he left the two pieces of gauze in Natividad’s vagina, and he pointed to other probable causes.