Orlando Garcia, Jr. vs. Ranida and Ramon Salvador


Participant Ranida Salvador underwent a medical examination at the Neighborhood Diagnostics Center (CDC) as a requirement for regular employment. Garcia, a medical technologist, performed the HBs Ag (Hepatitis B Surface area Antigen) test. On October 22, 1993, CDC released the test result suggesting that Ranida was “HBs Ag: Reactive.” The outcome bore the name and signature of Garcia as examiner and the rubber stamp signature of Dr. Castro as pathologist. When Ranida sent the test result to Dr. Sto. Domingo, the Company physician, the latter apprised her that the findings showed that she is experiencing Liver disease B, a liver disease.

Hence, based upon the medical report sent by Sto. Domingo, the Business terminated Ranida’s work for failing the health examination. It was later determined that there was an error in the previous assessment which the participant was not experiencing Hepatitis B. Respondent was rehired by the business. CONCERN:

Whether Garcia (CDC) is accountable for damages to the participants for releasing an inaccurate HBsAG test result.


The Court held that CDC was negligent because there was no licensed physician in CDC as required by law. CDC is not administered, directed and monitored by a certified physician as required by law, but by Ma. Ruby C. Calderon, a licensed Medical Technologist. In the License to Open and Run a Clinical Laboratory for the years 1993 and 1996 released by Dr. Juan R. Nañagas, M.D., Undersecretary for Health Facilities, Standards and Regulation, defendant-appellee Castro was called as the head of CDC. Nevertheless, accused pathologist is not the owner of the Neighborhood Diagnostic Center nor a worker of the exact same nor the employer of its staff members.

Top Writers
Professor P
Verified expert
4.9 (345)
Verified expert
4.9 (247)
Verified expert
5 (298)
hire verified writer

Defendant pathologist comes to the Community Diagnostic Center when and where a problem is referred to him. Castro’s infrequent visit to the clinical laboratory barely qualifies as an effective administrative supervision and control over the activities in the laboratory. “Supervision and control” means the authority to act directly whenever a specific function is entrusted by law or regulation to a subordinate; direct the performance of duty; restrain the commission of acts; review, approve, revise or modify acts and decisions of subordinate officials or units. Moreover, Garcia conducted the HBsAG test of respondent Ranida without the supervision of defendant-appellee Castro. Lastly, the disputed HBsAG test result was released to respondent Ranida without the authorization of defendant-appellee Castro.

Cite this page

Orlando Garcia, Jr. vs. Ranida and Ramon Salvador. (2016, Apr 12). Retrieved from http://studymoose.com/orlando-garcia-jr-vs-ranida-and-ramon-salvador-essay

Are You on a Short Deadline? Let a Professional Expert Help You
Let’s chat?  We're online 24/7