Scribd
Upload
33 views2 pages

Legal Opinion Banaag

Mr. Peter Banaag is considering filing a lawsuit against Mr. Arthur Sison for damages incurred by Mary when she was attacked by Mr. Sison's dog. The letter summarizes the facts of the case, cites the applicable laws on liability for damages caused by animals and responsibility for minors, and provides the legal opinion that Mr. Sison is liable because he negligently left his unlocked gate and dog unattended, knowing customers were often children, and Mary, as a minor, cannot be found contributorily negligent.

Uploaded by

Marie Lacap
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
33 views2 pages

Legal Opinion Banaag

Mr. Peter Banaag is considering filing a lawsuit against Mr. Arthur Sison for damages incurred by Mary when she was attacked by Mr. Sison's dog. The letter summarizes the facts of the case, cites the applicable laws on liability for damages caused by animals and responsibility for minors, and provides the legal opinion that Mr. Sison is liable because he negligently left his unlocked gate and dog unattended, knowing customers were often children, and Mary, as a minor, cannot be found contributorily negligent.

Uploaded by

Marie Lacap
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/ 2

January 22, 2023

Mr. Peter Banaag


16 Annapolis St.
Cubao, Quezon CIty

Dear Mr. Banaag,

In this letter, I will stipulate my legal opinion and analysis so you can
decide regarding a possible lawsuit and claim of damages against Mr. Arthur
Sison. I will first restate the facts, as I know, then I will provide you an
explanation of a law that applies to your case. And finally, I will render my
opinion on whether Mr. Arthur Sison is liable to Mary for damages incurred.

The Facts:

That on or about 3’oclock in the afternoon of the 12 th day of September,


Mary was attacked and bitten by the dog of Mr. Sison outside the gate of the
latter. Mary went to the house of Mr. Banaag to buy ice candy, when no one is
responding or answering to her call she tested the gate by pushing it which
triggered the dog to come out and attacked her. While Mary was being attacked
by the dog, Mr. Fred Puzon saw her and immediately helped her by kicking the
dog away. The dog continued to bark at them, when Mr. Sison heard the noise
outside he immediately went to the commotion and saw Mary was already bitten
by his dog. He ran, carry Mary and called the tricycle and brought her to the clinic
for treatment. Mr Banaag file a claim in the amount of P20,000.00, cost of the
emotional trauma and physical injuries of Mary, but Mr. Sison denied the claim
and reiterate that Mary pushed the gate which caused the dog to came out and
attacked her and also, he has a signage informing that there is a dog inside.

The Applicable Law:

Art.2183 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines

“ The possessor of an animal or whoever may make us of the same is


responsible for the damage which it may cause, although it may escape or be lost.
The responsibility shall cease only in case the damage should come from force
majeure or from the fault of the person who suffered damage”
S. No. 655

“That a child under nine years of age must be conclusively presumed


incapable of contributory negligence as a matter of law”

My Legal Opinion:

Mr. Arthur Sison is liable for claims and damages in favor of Mary,
because of the following reasons, to wit:

 Mr. Sison has proven his negligence when he left his gate unlocked
despite of his nature of business which is “ice candy” and his
customers are basically children and barely understand his signage
or warning
 He is the owner of the dog who attacked Mary on the date stated
above. And it is written in our law that the possessor of an animal is
responsible for any damages it will incur.
 Mary did not contribute to the negligence of what had happened
because she is not aware that there is a dog inside the vicinity or
compound of Mr. Sison, where she will buy “ice candy”.

If you decided to file a lawsuit against Mr. Arthur Sison, your case will
prosper and thrive due to the laws stipulated above.

Respectfully yours,
_________________________

You might also like