The
aforesaid medical reports/evaluations/certifications of different doctors in
favor of petitioner cannot be given probative value and their contents cannot
be deemed to constitute proof of the facts stated therein. It must be stressed that a document or writing
which is admitted not as independent evidence but merely as part of the
testimony of a witness does not constitute proof of the facts related therein.
In the same vein, the medical certificate which was identified and interpreted
in court by another doctor was not accorded probative value because the doctor
who prepared it was not presented for its identification. Similarly, in this case, since the doctors
who examined petitioner were not presented to testify on their findings, the
medical certificates issued on their behalf and identified by another doctor
cannot be admitted as evidence. Since a
medical certificate involves an opinion of one who must first be established as
an expert witness, it cannot be given weight or credit unless the doctor who
issued it is presented in court to show his qualifications. Thus, an unverified
and unidentified private document cannot be accorded probative value. It is precluded because the party against
whom it is presented is deprived of the right and opportunity to cross-examine
the person to whom the statements or writings are attributed. Its executor or author should be presented as
a witness to provide the other party to the litigation the opportunity to
question its contents. Being mere
hearsay evidence, failure to present the author of the letter renders its
contents suspect and of no probative value (Dr. Genevieve L. Huang Vs.
Philippine Hoteliers, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 180440. December 5, 2012).
Monday, December 24, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment