G.R. No. 139868. June 8, 2006 Petitioner: Alonzo Q. Ancheta Respondent: Candelaria Guersey-Dalaygon Ponente: Austria-Martinez, J. Facts: Spouses Audrey O’Neill and W. Richard Guersey were American citizens who have resided in the Philippines for 30 years. On July, 29, 1979, Audrey died, and she bequeathed her entire estate to Richard through a will. In 1981, Richard married Candelaria Guersey-Dalaygon. On July, 20, 1984, Richard died; leaving a will wherein he bequeathed his entire estate to respondent, save for his rights and interests over the A/G Interiors, Inc. shares, which he left to Kyle, his daughter with Audrey. The will was admitted to probate by the Court of Maryland, USA, and Atty. William Quasha of the Quasha Asperilla Ancheta Peña and Nolasco Law Offices was appointed as ancillary administrator. On October 19, 1987, petitioner filed in Special Sp ecial Proceeding No.9625 before the Makati RTC, a motion to declare Richard and Kyle as heirs of Aubrey and apportioned to them ¾ and ¼ of all the estate, respectively. This motion and project of partition was granted and approved by the trial court in its Order dated February 12, 1988. This was opposed by respondent on the ground that under the law of the State of Maryland, “a legacy passes to the legatee the entire interest of the testator in the property subject of the legacy.” Respondent argued that since Audrey devised her entire estate to Richard, then it should be wholly adjudicated to him and not merely ¾ thereof, and since Richard left his entire estate to the respondent, except for the A/G Interior Inc. shares, then the entire property should now pertain to respondent. The Court of Appeals annulled the trial court’s Orders in Speacial Proceeding No. 9625 abd later denied the appeal of the petitioner, thus the petition for review on certiorari.
Issue: Whether or not the petitioner willfully breached his fiduciary duty when he disregarded the laws of the State of Maryland on the distribution of Audrey’s estate in accordance with her will. Held: Petitioner’s failure to proficiently manage the distribution of Audrey’s estate according to the terms of her will amounted to extrinsic fraud. Being a foreign national, the intrinsic validity of Audrey’s will, especially with regard r egard as to who wh o are
her heris, is governed by her national law, i.e. the law of the State of Maryland, as provided in Art. 16 of the Civil Code. Article 1039 of the Civil Code further provides that “capacity to succeed is governed by the law of the nation of the decedent.”
