8/10/2019 2nd ALANO Case

1/1

DR. FILOTEO A. ALANO,Petitioner, vs. ZENAIDA MAGUD-LOGMAO,Respondent.G.R. No. 175540 April 7, 2014PERALTA, J.:

FACT: Amelito Logmao was brought to the East Avenue Medical Center by sidewal vendors who allegedly saw

him !all !rom the overpass. "here, his patient#s data sheet identi!ied him as Angelito Lugmoso. "heclinical abstract prepared by the surgical resident identi!ied him as Angelito $Logmao%, however.Considering that his deterioration progressively deteriorated, and no vacancy was available and uponrecommendation by a resident physician o! the &ational 'idney (nstitute who also does the rounds atEAMC, Logmao)Lugmoso was trans!erred to &'(. *is name was recorded as Angelito Lugmose at the&'(. "here being no relatives around, +enni!er, the transplant coordinator, was instructed to locate his!amily by enlisting the assistance o! the police and the media. r. -na, the chairman o! theepartment o! urgery, re/uested the Laboratory ection to conduct cross0matching and tissuetyping, so that i! Angelito e1pires despite the necessary medical care and management, and !ound asuitable organ donor, provided his !amily would consent to it, his organs could be detached andtransplanted promptly to a compatible bene!iciary. +enni!er secured the patient data o! Angelito andcontacted several television and radio stations !or the purpose o! locating the !amily o! Lugmoso. healso sought the assistance o! the P&P to locate the whereabouts o! Angelito#s !amily.

Angelito was eventually pronounced dead, hence r. -na set in motion the removal o! organs o! Angelito !ororgan transplantation. *e sought permission !rom the E1ecutive irector, r. 2iloteo Alano, who issued aMemorandum approving the transplant as long as all the re/uisite re/uirements had been complied with and the&3( had been in!ormed o! the planned transplant. "he &3( thru r. Ma1imo Reyes gave verbal approval to theplanned transplant. "hus, a medical per!ormed a series o! surgeries to remove Angelito#s heart, spleen, pancreas,and liver. &'( issued a press release announcing the success!ul organ transplant. A cousin o! Angelito heard onthe radio that the donor was a certain Angelitlo Lugmoso who is now at 2uneraria -ro. ensing a vagueresemblance to Angelito Logmao#s name, she reported it to his mother, 4enaida Logmao. 5hen they went to the2urearia -ro to see the remains, it was there that they discovered the remains o! Angelito in a cheap caset.3ecause o! this discovery, 4enaida !iled a complaint !or damages.

IUE!1" # 5hether respondent6s su!!erings were brought about by petitioner6s alleged negligence in grantingauthori7ation !or the removal or retrieval o! the internal organs o! respondent6s son who had been declared braindead.

$ELD# NO. 5henpetitioner gave authori7ation !or the removal o! some o! the internal organs to be transplantedto other patients, he did so in accordance with the letter o! the law, Republic Act $R.A.% &o. 89, as amended byPresidential ecree $P..% ;mae certain> that>all reasonable e!!orts> are e1erted to locate the patient6s ne1t o! in, even enumerating ways in which to ensurethat notices o! the death o! the patient would reach said relatives. (t also clearly stated that permission orauthori7ation to retrieve and remove the internal organs o! the deceased was being given -&L? (2 the provisionso! the applicable law had been complied with. uch instructions reveal that petitioner acted prudently by directinghis subordinates to e1haust all reasonable means o! locating the relatives o! the deceased. *e could not havemade his directives any clearer. *e even speci!ically mentioned that permission is only being granted (2 theepartment o! urgery has complied with all the re/uirements o! the law. "here!ore, there can be no cavil thatpetitioner employed reasonable means to disseminate noti!ications intended to reach the relatives o! thedeceased.