ELCANO VS HILL GRN L-24803 BARREDO, J.: FACTS: Reginald Hill accidentally killed the son of Elcano.

He was acquitted from the criminal case due to the efense of minority. Elcano filed a civil case alleging damages against Reginald and his father from whom the latter was receiving subsistence. Hills moved to dismiss the case on the ground that case was barred by res adjudicata and that the father was relieved from guardianship of the defendant through emancipation by marriage. The case was dismissed thus this appeal. ISSUE: Whether or not the civil action for damages is barred by the acquittal of Reginald in the criminal case. RULING: Criminal negligence is in violation of the criminal law while civil negligence is a culpa aquiliana or quasi-delict, of ancient origin, having always had its own foundation and individuality, separate from criminal negligence. Culpa aquiliana includes voluntary and negligent acts which may be punishable by law. It results that the acquittal of Reginald in the criminal case has not extinguished his liability for quasi-delict, hence the acquittal is not a bar to the instant action against him. Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover twice for the same act or omission of the defendant. Likewise, emancipation does not carry with it freedom to enter into transactions or do any act that can give rise to judicial litigation. And surely, killing someone else invites judicial action.