You're currently signed in as:
User

ROGELIO E. RAMOS v. CA

This case has been cited 1 times or more.

2010-02-02
CORONA, J.
First, there existed between PSI and Dr. Ampil an employer-employee relationship as contemplated in the December 29, 1999 decision in Ramos v. Court of Appeals[18] that "for purposes of allocating responsibility in medical negligence cases, an employer-employee relationship exists between hospitals and their consultants."[19] Although the Court in Ramos later issued a Resolution dated April 11, 2002[20] reversing its earlier finding on the existence of an employment relationship between hospital and doctor, a similar reversal was not warranted in the present case because the defense raised by PSI consisted of a mere general denial of control or responsibility over the actions of Dr. Ampil.[21]