St Louis Realty V Ca 5zw4n

St. Louis Realty Corporation vs. C.A. GR No L-46061 (November 14, 1984) J AQUINO Facts: St. Louis Reality Corp. caused to be published on the December 15, 1968 Sunday Times an ment featuring the house of Dr. Conrado J. Aramil. Said ment was entitled “Where the Heart is”, showed a picture of Dr. Aramil’s house but with the family of Arcadio S. Acradio depicted as the owners. It also had written text stating that the Arcadios had purchased such house in Brookside Hills village at an affordable rate. Such was done without the permission of Dr. Aramil. Upon seeing a reprint of the ment on the same paper on January 5, 1969, Dr. Aramil immediately wrote said reality corporation stating that the latter did not obtain permission to post his house in the ment and depict it as being owned by another family. Dr. Aramil explained that it has caused him humiliation as his colleagues and friends who recognize his house or have been to such have uttered remarks questioning the ownership of his house, his integrity, if he rented the house from the Arcadios and even that his wife was that of another husband. He then warned the corporation that he would pursue legal action if such acts were not explained satisfactorily to him within one week of receipt of the letter. Said letter was received and answered by Ernesto Magtoto, an officer of said corporation who was in charge of advertising. He immediately stopped its publication and ed Dr. Aramil to apologise. However no rectification or apology was ever published. Dr. Aramil’s counsel demanded actual, moral and exemplary damages of P 110,000 from the corporation on February 20, 1969. The corporation answered by claiming that it was an honest mistake and that a rectification will be made. The corporation published a new ment on March 18, 1969 which again portrayed the Arcadio family, but this time with their real house. However no apology or rectification was included. This led to the filing of a complaint for damages against the said corporation on March 29, 1969. The lower court and appellate court ruled in favor of Dr. Aramil; awarding him P 8,000 as actual damages, P 20,000 as moral damages and P 2,000 for attorney’s fees. Issue: W/N case is covered by article 26 of the Civil Code Held: Yes, the case falls under said article which warrants the award of damages to Dr. Aramil. Said article provides that "every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons". "Prying into the privacy of another's residence" and "meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of another" and "similar acts", "though they may not constitute a criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other relief". Such article was violated when the corporation released an ment depicting Dr. Armil’s home to be that of another, without Dr. Aramil’s permission. Further, bad faith and negligence was evident as the corporation refused to publish a rectification or apology despite demands The damages awarded are proper being enunciated by Articles 2200, 2208 and 2219 of the Civil Code. Article 2219 allows moral damages for acts mentioned in Article 26.