CaseDi ges tby DONI TA
r espondentcourt sOr Or dersunderat t ack.
#1 -[ G. R.No.124320.Mar ch2,1999]
Pet i t i oners cont end t hat t he i ssue of hei r shi p shoul d firs t be det ermi mi ned bef ore t ri aloft he case coul d proceed.I ti s pet i t i oner’ s submi mi ssi on t hatt her espondentcourtshoul dhaveproce ededwi t ht he t ri aland si mul t aneousl yr esol ved t he i ssue ofhei r shi pi nt he same me case.
HEI RS OF GUI DO YAPTI NCHA HAY AND I SABEL YAPTI NCHA HAY vs. HON.ROY S.DEL ROSARI O,et . al .
FACTS:Peti t i onerscl ai mt hatt heyaret hel egalhei rsoft hel ateGui do andI sabelYapt i nchay,t heown wner scl ai mant sofLotsi t uat edi nBancal , Carmo mona,Cavi t e.Pet i t i onersexecut ed an Ext raJudi ci alSet t l eme mentof t heest at eoft hedeceasedGu Gui do andIs abelYapt i nchay.Subsequent l y, pet i t i oners di scovered t hat a port i on, i f not al l , of the af oresai d propert i eswe wer eti t l ed i nt hename meofr espondentGol den BayRe Real t y and Dev el opme ment Cor porat i on ( Gol den Bay) .t he di sco ver y ofwhat happened t o subj ectparcel sofl and,pet i t i onersfil ed a comp mpl ai ntf or ANNULMENT and/or DECLARATI ON OF NULLI TY OF TI TLE bef or e Branch 21 oft heRegi onalTri alCourti nI mus,Cavi t e.
I SSUE UE:I STHE CON ONTENTI ONOF OFPETI TI ONER ERCORRECT CT? RUL ULI NG:NO. i t i oners Pet i t i on f or Cert i orari bef ore t hi s Court i s an i mpr oper - Pet r ecour se.Thei rproperr eme medyshoul dhavebeenanappeal .Anorderof di smi mi ssal ,be i tri ghtorwr wrong,i s a finalor der ,whi ch i s subj ectt o appealandnotapropersubj ectofcert i orari Wher eappeali savai l abl e asar e me me dy ,c e r t i o r ar iwi l lno tl i e . T espondent cour t di d not commi mmi t gr ave abuse ofdi scr et i on i n - The r i ss ui ng t he ques t i oned Or der di smi mi ss i ng t he Seco nd Ame mended Comp mpl ai ntofpet i t i oners ,as i tapt l y rat i oci nate d and rul ed: Butthe pl ai nt i ffswhocl ai medt obet hel egalhei rsoft hesai dGui doandI sabel Yapt i nchayhavenotshownanypr ooforevenasembl anceofi t-except t he al l egat i ons t hatthey are t he l egalhei rsoft he af oreme ment i oned Yapt i nchays - t hat t hey have been decl ar ed t he l egalhei r s oft he deceasedcoupl e.Now,t hedet ermi mi nati on ofwhoaret hel egalhei rsof t hedece asedcoupl emu mustbemade i nt hepr operspeci alproc eedi ngs i ncourt ,andnoti nan ordi narysui tf orreconveyanceofpropert y.Thi s mustt akepr ecedenceovert heacti on f orr econveyance.Thet ri alcourt cannotma makeadecl arati on ofhei rshi pi nt heci vi lacti on f ort hereason t hatsuch a decl ar at i on can onl y be made i n a speci alpr ocee di ng. UnderSect i on 3,Rul e1 oft he1997 Revi sed Rul esofCourt ,a ci vi l act i on i s defined as one by whi ch a part y sues anot her f or t he enf orceme mentorprot ect i on ofari ght ,orthepreventi on orredressofa wr ongwhi l easpeci alpr oceedi ngi sar eme dybywhi chapar t yseekst o
Upon l earni ngt hatGol den Baysol d port i onsoft heparcel sofl and i n ques t i on, pet i t i oner s fil ed wi t ht he RTC an Amended Comp mpl ai nt t o i mpl eadnew andaddi t i onaldef endant sandt ome ment i ont heTCT CTst obe annul l ed. But t he r es pondent cour t di smi mi ss ed t he Ame mende d Comp mpl ai nt. Pet i t i oners move d f or r econsi der at i on of t he Or der di smi mi ss i ng t he Amended Comp mpl ai nt .Themo mot i on wasgr ant ed byt he whi ch f ur t heral l owedt heher ei n pet i t i oner st ofil eaSecondAme nded Comp mpl ai nt , wh whi ch t hey pr omp mpt l y di d. The pri vat e r es pondent s pre sent ed a Mot i on t o Di smi mi ss on t he gr ounds t hatt he comp mpl ai nt f ai l ed t o st at e a cause ofact i on,t hatpl ai nt i ffsdi d nothave a ri ghtofact i on,t hat t hey havenotest abl i shed t hei rst at us as hei rs ,t hatt hel and bei ng cl ai med i sdi ffer entf rom t hatoft he def endant s,and t hatpl ai nti ffscl ai m was bar r ed byl aches.The
sai d Mot i on t oDi Di smi mi sswa wasgrant ed.Pet i t i onersi nt erposed a Mot i on f orReconsi derat i onbutt onoavai l .Thesame mewasdeni edbyt heRTC. C. Undaunt ed,pet i t i onershavecomebef oret hi sCourtt oseek rel i eff rom 1
establ i sh a st atus,a ri ght ,ora parti cul ar f act .I ti s then deci si vel y cl eart hatt hedecl arat i on ofhei r shi p can be madeonl yi n a speci al pr oce edi ng i nasmu much as t he pet i t i oner s her e ar e se eki ng t he est abl i shmentofastat usorri ght .
r es pondent of t he t i t l et ot he Cal ooc an pr oper t yi n her name me, pet i t i oner s fil ed bef oret he RTC a comp mpl ai ntagai nstr espondentf or annul mentoft he Affidavi tofAdj udi cat i on exe cut ed by herand t he t ransf ercerti ficat eoft i t l ei ssued i n hername me.Pet i t i onersal l eged that r espondenti snotre l at ed what soevert othedeceased Port ugal ,hence, not ent i t l ed t oi nher i tt he Cal oocan par celof l and and t hat she perj ur ed her sel fwhen shema madef al sere prese nt at i onsi n herAffid ffi davi t ofAdj udi cati on.
[ G. R.No.155555.August16,2005]
Af t ert r i al ,t het r i alcour t ,wi t houtr esol vi ngt hei ssuesdefineddur i ng
# 2 -I SABEL P.PORT RTUGA GAL and JOSE DO DOUGL GLAS POR ORTUGA GAL JR. ,
ack ofcauseofacti on pret ri al,di smi mi ssed t hecasef orl ont hegr ound
ONI LA POR ORTUGALBELTRAN,respondent. pet i t i oner s,vs.LEON
t hat pet i t i oner s st at us and ri ght as put at i ve hei r s had not been est abl i shed bef oreaprobat e( )court ,andl over ack ofj uri sdi cti on s i c
CARP RPI O MORALES,J. :
t hecase,ci t i ngHei r so fGu i doan dI s ab e lY ap t i nc h a yv .De lRo s ar i o .CA Affir me d. FACTS: Jose Q.Por t ugal( Port ugal )marr i ed Paz Lazo.However ,af t er f ew years,Port ugalmarri ed pet i t i onerI sabeldel a Puert a who gave bi r t ht oaboywhom shename dJoseDougl asPor t ugalJr . ,herher ei n co-pet i t i oner . Me Meanwhi l e, Paz gave bi rt h t o a gi r l , Al el i , her ei n r espondent . Port ugaland hi sf our ( 4) si bl i ngs exec ut ed a Deed of Extr a-Judi ci alParti t i on and Wai verofRi ght sovert heestat eoft hei r f ather ,Ma Mari ano Port ugal ,who di ed i nt est at e.I nt he deed,Port ugal s si bl i ngswai vedt hei rri ght s,i nt erest s,andparti ci pati on overaparcelof l and l ocatedi n Cal oocan i n hi sf avor .Thus,t heRegi st ryofDeeds f or Cal oocan Ci t yi ssued Transf erCe Cer t i ficateofTi t l e( TCT CT)No.34292 cover i ngtheCa Cal oocan par celofl andi nt hename meofJoseQ. Q.Port ugal ,
I SSUE: Wh Whet herornott he r espondent s have t oi nst i t ut e a speci al
procee di ng t o det er mi ne t hei rst at us as hei r s ofAnacl et o Cabr er a bef or et heycan fil ean or di naryci vi lact i on t onul l i f yt heaffidavi t sof Anacl et oCabr er aandDi oni si aReyes.
RULI NG:Yes ,t he det er mi nat i on ofwho arethe l egalhei r s oft he
decease d coupl emu m ustbe made i nt hepr operspeci alproc eedi ngsi n court ,and noti n an ordi narysui tf orreconveyanceofpr opert y.Thi s must t ake pr ec ede nce ov er t he act i on f or r ec onve yance. The r espondent shaveyett osubstant i at et hei rcl ai m ast hel egalhei rsof Anacl et oCabr er awhoar e,t hus,ent i t l edt ot hesubj ectpr oper t y .
marr i edtoPazC.Lazo. Pazdi ed.Port ugaldi edi nt est ate.Respondent
execut edanAffidavi tofAdj udi cat i on bySol eHei rofEst at eofDeceased Person adj udi cat i ng t o her sel ft he Cal oocan par celofl and.TCT CT No. 34292/T172i nPort ugal snamewassubsequentl ycancel l edandi ni t s st ead TCT CT No.159813[ 14]wasi ssued by t heRegi st ryofDeedsf or Cal oocan Ci t yon Mar ch 9,1988 i nt he name meofr espondent ,Leoni l a Port ugal Bel t ran,marri edt oMe MerardoM M. .Bel t ran,Jr. Lat erget t i ngwi wi nd oft hedeathi n 1985ofPort ugalandst i l ll ateroft he1988t ransf erby
TheRul esofCour tpr ovi det hatonl yar ealpar t yi ni nt er esti sal l owed t oprosecut eand def end an acti on i n court .A realpartyi ni nt eresti s t heonewh who st andst obebenefit edori nj ur edbythej udgme menti nt he 2
sui tor t he one ent i t l ed t ot he avai l st her eof .Such i nt er est ,t o be consi der ed a r eal i nt er es t , mu must be one whi ch i s pr es ent and subst ant i al ,as di st i ngui shed f r om a mer e expect ancy ,ora f ut ur e, cont i ngent ,subordi nateorconsequent i ali nt erest . G. R.No.162956
l i f et i me,Graci anasol d hershar eovert hel and t oEt t a.Thus,maki ng t hel att ert hesol eown wneroft heonehal fshareoft hesubj ectparcelof l and. Subsequent l y , Et t a di ed and t he pr oper t y passe d on t o pet i t i oners Pet erand Debor ah Ann by vi r t ue ofan Ext r aJudi ci al Set t l eme ment of Est at e. Lat er on, Pet er and Debor ah sol dt he l and t oDi Di oni si oandCatal i naFernandez( SpousesFernandez) ,al sothei rcor espondent si nt hecaseatbar .Af t ert hesal e,SpousesFernandeztook possessi on oft hesai dareai nt hesubj ectparcelofl and.
Apri l10,2008
#3-FAUSTI NO REYES,ESPERI RI DI ONRE REYES,JULI ETA C.RI VERA, and EUTI QUI O DI CO,JR. R. ,pet i t i oner s,vs. PETER B.ENRI QUEZ,f or
When SpousesFer nandez ,t r i ed t or egi st ert hei rshar ei nt hesubj ect l and,t heydi scove r edt hatce rt ai ndocument spr eve ntt hem f r om doi ng so.Al l egi ngt hatt hef oregoi ngdocument saref raudul entandfict i t i ous, t here spondent sfil eda comp mpl ai ntf orannul mentornul l i ficat i on oft he af or eme ment i oned docume ment sand f ordama mage s.TheRTC di smi mi ss edthe case on t he gr ound t hat the r espondent spl ai nti ffs wer e act ual l y seeki ng firstand f or emo mostt o be decl are d hei r s ofAnacl et o Cabr er a si ncet heycan notdema mand t hepart i t i on oft herealpropert ywi t hout firs tbei ngdecl ar ed asl egalhei r sand such maynotbe donei n an ordi naryci vi lacti on,asi nt hi scase,butt hrough aspeci alproceedi ng speci fical l yi nst i t ut edf orthepurpose.CArever sed.
hi msel fand At t or neyi nFact ofhi s daughter DEBORAH ANN C. ENRI RI QUE UEZ, and SPS. DI ONI SI O FERNA NANDE DEZ and CATALI NA FERNAND NDEZ,r es pondents.
FACTS:The subj ectma mat t eroft he pre sentcasei s a parc elofl and l ocat ed i n Tal i say , Cebu. Accor di ng t o pet i t i oner s Faust i no Reye s, Esperi di on Reyes,Jul i et aC. C.Ri vera,andEut i qui oDi Di co,Jr. ,t heyaret he l awf ulhei rsofDi oni si aReyeswhocoownedt hesubj ectparc elofl and wi t h Anacl et o Cabr er a. Pet i t i oner s execut ed an Ext r aj udi ci al Set t l eme mentwi t hSal eoft heEst ateofDi oni si aReyes( t heExtr aJudi ci al Set t l eme ment )i nvol vi ng a port i on of t he subj ect par cel ofl and. The pet i t i oner s and t he known hei r s of Anacl et o Cabrer a exe cut ed a Segr egat i on ofRealEst at eand Confirma mat i on ofSal e( t heSegr egat i on and Confir mat i on)ov ert he same me pr oper t y .Thus,TCT wer ei ss ued r e s pe ct i v e l y .
I SSUE UE:Wh Whet herornott he r espondent s have t oi nst i t ut e a speci al procee di ng t o det er mi ne t hei rst at us as hei r s ofAnacl et o Cabr er a bef or et hey can fil e an or di nary ci vi lact i on t o nul l i f yt he di sput ed docume ment s?
Respondent sPet erB.Enri quez( Pet er)f orhi msel fandon behal fofhi s mi nordaught erDebor ah Ann C.Enri quez( Debor ah Ann) ,al soknown as Di na Abdul l ah Enri quezAl sagoff,on t heotherhand,al l ege st hat t hei r predecessor i ni nt erestAnacl et o Cabrer a and hi s wi f e Patr i ci a Seguer a Cabrer a( col l ect i ve l yt he Spouses Ca Cabre r a) owned ½ proi ndi vi so sharei nt hesubj ectparcelofl and.Theyf urt heral l egethat SpousesCabr er awer esurvi vedbyt wodaught er s–Gr aci ana,whodi ed si ngl eand wi t houti ssue,and Et t a,t hewi wi f eofr espondentPet erand mot herofr es pondentDe Debor ah Ann –wh who succe ededthei rpar ent s’ ri ght sand t ook possessi on oft hesubj ectparce lofl and.Duri ngher
RUL ULI NG: G:YES. An or di nar yci vi lact i on i sonebywhi ch apar t ysuesanot herf ort he enf orceme mentorprot ect i on ofari ght ,orthepreventi on orredressofa wr ong.A speci alpr oceedi ng,on t heot herhand,i sar eme dybywhi ch a part y seeks t o est abl i sh a st at us,ari ghtora part i cul arf act.The Rul esofCourtprovi dethatonl ya realpartyi ni nt eresti sal l owed t o prosecut eanddef endan acti on i ncourt .A realpart yi ni nt eresti sthe onewhost andst obebenefit edori nj ur edbyt hej udgme menti nt hesui t 3
ortheoneent i t l edt otheavai l sthereof .Suchi nt erest ,t obeconsi dered ar eali nt er est , must be one whi ch i s prese nt and subst ant i al , as di st i ngui shed f r om a mer e expect ancy , or a f ut ur e, cont i ngent , subor di nateor consequent i ali nt er est .A pl ai nt i ffi sa r ealpart yi n i nt er estwhenhei stheonewhohasa l egalri ghtt oenf orceorprot ect , whi l ea def endanti sa r ealpar t yi ni nt er estwhen hei st heonewho has a corr el at i ve l egal obl i gat i on t or edres s a wr ong done t ot he pl ai nt i ff by r eason of t he def endant ’ s act or omi ssi on whi ch had vi ol at ed t he l egalr i ghtoft he f or me r .The pur pose oft he r ul ei st o pr ot ectpersonsagai nstundueand unnecessaryl i t i gat i on.I tl i kewi se ensurest hatt hecourtwi l lhavethebenefitofhavi ngbef orei tt hereal adversepart i esi nt heconsi derat i on ofacase.Thus,apl ai nt i ff’ sri ght t oi nst i t ut ean ordi naryci vi lacti on shoul dbebased onhi sownri ghtt o therel i efsought .
r ecor ds oft hi scase whi ch woul d show t hataspeci alprocee di ngto have t hemsel ve s decl ar ed as hei r s of Anacl et o Cabre r a had been i nst i t ut ed.Assuch,t hetri alcourtcorr ect l y di smi ssed t he case f or t her ei sa l ack ofcauseofact i on when acasei si nst i t ut ed bypart i es whoar enotr ealpar t i esi ni nt er est .Whi l eadecl ar at i onofhei r shi pwas notprayed f ori nt hecompl ai nt ,i ti scl earf rom theal l egat i onstherei n t hatt heri ghtt herespondent ssoughtt oprot ectorenf orcei st hatofan hei rofone oft he r egi st ere d co-ownersoft he propert y pri ortothe i ssuance oft he new t ransf ercert i ficat es oft i t l et hatthey seek t o cancel .Thus,t herei saneedt oestabl i sh t hei rst atusassuchhei rsi n t heproperf orum. Furt her more ,i twoul d be superfluous t o st i l ls ubj ectt he est at et o admi ni st rat i on proceedi ngssi nceadet ermi nati on oft hepart i es'st atus as hei rscoul d be achi eved i nt heordi nary ci vi lcase fil ed becausei t appearedfr om t herecordsoft hecasethatt heonl ypropertyl ef tbythe decedentwasthesubj ectmat t eroft hecaseandt hatt hepart i eshave al re ady present ed evi dence t o est abl i sh t hei rri ghtas hei rsofthe decedent .I nt hepr esentcase,however ,not hi ngi nt herecordsoft hi s case shows t hat t he onl y proper t yl ef t by t he deceas ed Anacl et o Cabr er ai sthe subj ectl ot ,and nei t herhad r espondent s Pet erand DeborahAnnpresent edanyevi dencet oest abl i sht hei rr i ght sashei rs, consi deri ng especi al l yt hati tappears t hatthere are ot herhei rsof Anacl et oCabr er awhoar enotpar t i esi nt hi scaset hathadsi gnedone oft hequest i oneddocument s.
I ncaseswher ei nal l egedhei r sofadecedenti nwhosenameapr opert y wasr egi st er edsuet or ecovert hesai dpr oper t yt hr ough t hei nst i t ut i on ofan ordi naryci vi lact i on,such asacompl ai ntf orreconveyanceand parti t i on,ornul l i ficat i on oft ransf ercerti ficat eoft i t l esandotherdeeds ordocumentsrel at ed t her et o,t he SC has consi st entl y rul ed t hata decl arati on ofhei rshi pi si mproperi nan ordi naryci vi lacti on si ncethe matt eri s" wi t hi nt heexcl usi vecompet enceoft hecourti n aspeci al proceedi ng. " I nt hei nst antcase,whi l et hecompl ai ntwasdenomi nat edasan act i on f or t he " Decl ar at i on of Non-Exi st ency, Nul l i t y of Deeds, and Cancel l ati on ofCert i ficat es ofTi t l e,et c. , "a revi ew oft he al l egat i ons t her ei n re veal sthatt heri ghtbei ngassert ed by t herespondent sar e t hei rri ghtashei r sofAnacl et oCabr er awhotheycl ai m coownedonehal foft hesubj ectpr opert yandnotmer el yonef ourt hasst at edi nt he document st her espondent ssoughtt oannul . The r espondent s her ei n, except f or t hei r al l egat i ons, have ye tt o subst ant i atet hei rcl ai m asthel egalhei rsofAnacl et oCabrer awhoare, t hus,ent i t l edt ot hesubj ectpropert y.Nei t heri sthereanythi ngi nt he
CaseDi gestby Ami elPascual 4
G. R.No.163604
Republ i cfil ed a Pet i t i on f orCert i oraribef oret heCA and cont ended t hatdecl arat i on ofpr esumpti vedeat h ofapers on underArt i cl e41 of t heFami l yCode i snotaspeci alproceedi ngora caseofmul t i pl eor separateappeal s requi ri ng a record on appealr ei t erat i ng i t s earl i er ar gument .
May6,2005
t i t i o ne r ,v s .HE HON. # 4 -REPUBLI C OF THE PHI LI PPI NES,pe T COURT OF APPEALS ( Twent i et h Di vi si on) , HON. PRESI DI NG JUDGE FORTUNI TO L.MADRONA,RTCBR.35 and APOLI NARI A MALI NAO JOMOC, r espondent s.
The CA deni ed t he Republ i c’ s Pet i t i on f orCer t i or ar i .I tr easons t hat he i nst antpet i t i on i si n the natureofaspeci alpr oceedi ng thatt
CARPI OMORALES,J. :
i t i on mer el y see ks f or a and not an or di nary act i on. The pet decl arat i on by t hetr i alcourtoft hepre sumpti vedeath ofabsent ee spouse Cl ement e Jomoc .I t does not see k t he enf or ce ment or prot ect i on ofari ghtort hepreventi on orredressofawr ong.Nei t her does i ti nvol vea demand ofri ghtora causeofact i on t hatcan be
The RTC of Or moc Ci t y gr ant ed t he pet i t i on " I n t he Mat t er of Decl ar at i on ofPre sumpt i ve Deat h ofAbsent ee Spouse Cl ement e P. Jomoc”pet i t i onedbyApol i nar i aJomocont hebasi soft heComi ssi oner r eport decl ari ng t he absent ee spouse presumpt i vel y dead. Stat ed therei ni sthatCl ement el ef tApol i nari ani neyearsearl i er .
enf or ced agai nstany per son .The i nst ant pet i t i on, bei ng i nt he natureofaspeci alproceedi ng,OSG shoul d havefil ed,i n addi t i on
JudgeFor t uni t oL.Madr onaci t ed Ar t .41,par .2 oft heFami l yCode, st ati ngthatf ort hepurposeofcont ract i ngaval i dsubsequentmarri age duri ngthesubsi st enceofaprevi ousmarr i agewher ethepri orspouse had been absentf orf ourconsecut i veyear s,t hespouseprese ntmust
t oi t sNoti ceofAppeal ,arecordonappeal . I ssue:I sapeti ti on f ordecl arati on oft hepresumpti vedeath ofa person i nt henatureofaspeci alproceedi ng?
y pr oceedi ngs f i nst i t ut e summar or t he decl arat i on ofpr esumpti ve
deat h oft he absent eespouse,wi t houtprej udi cetothe effectoft he r eappearanceoft heabsentspouse.
Rul i ng: No. A pet i t i on f or decl arat i on of pres umpt i ve death i sa
summar y pr oc ee di ng under t he Fami l y Code and not a spec i al procee di ngundert heRevi sedRul esofCourt .
TheRepubl i cappeal edt heRTC’ sor derbyfil i ngaNot i ceofAppealand i nsi st sthatt hedecl arat i on ofpr esumpti vedeathunderArt .41oft he FC i s nota speci alproc eedi ng i nvol vi ng mul t i pl e appeal s wher ea rec ordonappealshal lbefil edandserve di nl i kemanner .Thepet i t i on f or decl ar at i on of pr esumpt i ve deat h of an absent spouse i s not i ncl uded i n Rul e109oft heRul esofCourtt hate numer at est hecases wher ei n mul t i pl eappeal sar eal l owed.Republ i ccont endst hatame r e not i ceofappealsuffices.
Rati o: Ar t i cl e41 oft heFami l y Code,upon whi ch t het ri alcourtanchored
i t sgrantoft hepet i t i on f orthedecl arati on ofpresumpti vedeat hoft he absentspouse,provi des:
RTC di sapprovedRepubl i c’ sNot i ceofAppeal .
A marr i agecont r act edbyanypersonduri ngt hesubsi st ence Ar t .41. ofa pre vi ous marr i age shal lbe nul land voi d,unl essbef or et he cel ebrat i on oft hesubsequentmarr i age,t hepri orspouseshad been
Republ i c’ sMot i onf orReconsi derati onwasdeni ed. 5
absentf orf ourconsecut i veyear sand t hespousepr esenthad awel l f ounded bel i eft hatt heabsents pouseswas al r eady dead.I n caseof di sappearancewher et her ei sdangerofdeathundert heci r cumst ances setf ort hi nt heprovi si onsofArt i cl e391oft heCi vi lCode,an absence ofonl yt woyearsshal lbesuffici ent .
Si nce Ti t l e XI of t he Fami l y Code,ent i t l ed SUMMARY JUDI CI AL PROCEEDI NG I N THE FAMI LYLAW,cont ai nst hef ol l owi ngpr ov i si on, i nt eral i a: Ar t .238. Unl essmodi fiedbytheSupre meCour t ,t heproce dur alr ul es
i nt hi sTi t l eshal lappl yi provi dedf ori nt hi sCodesrequi ri ng n allcases Fort he pur pose ofcont r act i ng t he subsequentmarr i ageundert he
summar y court pr oceedi ngs.Such cas es shal lbe deci ded i n an
y prece di ngpar agraph,t hespousespr esentmusti nst i t ut easummar
expedi t i ousmannerwi t houtr egardtot echni calrul es.
or t he decl arat i on of proceedi ng as provi ded i n t hi s Code f pr esumpti vedeathoft heabsent ee,wi t houtpr ej udi cet otheeffectofa r eappearanceoft heabsentspouse.
Ther ei sno doubtt hatt he pet i t i on ofApol i nar i aJomoc r equi r ed, and i s,t heref ore,asummar y proceedi ng undert he Fami l y Code, notaspeci alproceedi ng undert he Revi sedRul esofCourtappeal
Rul e 41,Secti on 2 of t he Revi sed Rul es of Court ,on Mode s of
f orwhi ch cal l sf orthe fil i ng ofa Record on Appeal .I tbei ng a
Appeal ,i nvokedbyt het r i alcour ti n di sappr ovi ngpet i t i oner ’ sNot i ceof Appeal ,pr ovi des:
summar y or di nary proceedi ng, t he fil i ng of a Not i ce ofAppeal f r om thetr i alcour t ’ sorders uffi ced.
Sec.2. Modesofappeal .-
Al so,Republ i c’ sf ai l ur et o at t ach t o hi s pet i t i on bef or et he appel l at e court a copy of t he t r i al court ’ s or der denyi ng i t s mot i on f or r econsi derat i on of t he di sappr oval of i t s Not i ce of Appeal i s not necessari l yf atal ,f ortherul esofprocedurearenott obeappl i ed i na t echni calsense.TheCAshoul d’ vedi r ect edRepubl i ct ocompl ywi t ht he rul eandnotdi smi ssedt hepet i t i on out ri ght .
( a )Or ot he Cour tofAppeal si n cases di nar y appeal . T - he appealt deci ded by t he Regi onalTri alCourti nt he exer ci se ofi t s ori gi nal j ur i sdi ct i on shal lbet aken byfil i nga not i ceofappealwi t ht hecour t whi ch r ender edt hej udgme ntorfinalor derappeal edf r om andser vi ng a copy t her eofupon t headver separt y.Norecor d on appeals hal lbe alproceedi ngs ti pl e requi r ed excepti n speci andot hercases ofmul
G. R.No.157912
.I n or separat e appeal s where the l aw or t hese Rul es so r equi r e such case s,t he r ecor d on appealshal lbe fil ed and ser ved i nl i ke manner .( Emphasi sandunder scor i ngsuppl i ed)
December13,2007
t i t i one r ,v s. #5-ALANJOSEPH A.SHEKER,Pe ESTATE OF ALI CE O. Res pondent . SHEKER,VI CTORI AS.MEDI NAAdmi ni st r at r i x,
Bythe tr i alcourt ’ sci tat i on ofArt i cl e41 oft heFami l yCode,i ti s
AUSTRI AMARTI NEZ,J. :
gat her ed t hatt he peti t i on ofApol i nar i aJomoc t o have herabsent spousedecl aredpr esumpti vel ydead had f ori t spur poseherdesi r e
RTC admi t t ed t o probatet hehol ogr aphi cwi l lofAl i ceO.Shekerand i ssued an order f or al lt he cr edi t ors t o fil et hei rrespecti ve cl ai ms agai nst t he est at e. I n compl i ance t her ewi t h, Al an Sheker fil ed on Oct ober7,2002 a cont i ngentcl ai m f oragent ' scommi ssi on duehi m
t o cont r act a val i d subsequent mar r i age.Ergo,t he peti ti on f or t hatpur posei sa " summarypr oceedi ng, "f ol l owi ng abovequot ed Ar t .41,par agr aph2oft heFami l yCode. 6
amounti ng t o appr oxi mat el y P206, 250. 00 i nt he ev entoft he sal e of cer t ai n par cel s ofl and bel ongi ng t ot he est at e,and t he amountof P275, 000. 00,asrei mbur sementf orexpensesi ncurr ed and/ort o be i ncurr ed by pet i t i oneri nt he courseofnegot i at i ng t he sal e ofsai d r e al t i e s.
procee di ngs; but i n t he absence of speci al pr ovi si ons, t he rul es provi dedf ori nPartIoft heRul esgoverni ngordi naryci vi lacti onsshal l beappl i cabl et ospeci alpr oceedi ngs,asf araspr act i cabl e. The wor d" pr act i cabl e"i s defined as : ossi p bl et o pr ac t i c e orper f or m; 4 Thi smeans c a pab l eofb ei ngp uti nt opr ac t i c e ,do neora c c o mp l i s he d. t hati nt heabsenceofspeci alprovi si ons,rul esi nordi naryact i onsmay beappl i edi nspeci alpr oceedi ngsasmuchaspossi bl eandwher edoi ng sowoul d notpose an obst acl et o sai d proc eedi ngs.Nowher ei nt he Rul esofCourtdoesi tcategori cal l ysaythatrul esi n ordi naryacti ons arei nappl i cabl eormerel ysuppl et orytospeci alproceedi ngs.
Theexecut r i xoft heEst at eofAl i ceO.Sheker ,Vi ct or i naMe di na,moved f ort hedi smi ssalofsai dmoneycl ai m agai nstt heest at eont hegrounds t hat: ( 1)t herequi si t edocketf ee,asprescri bed i n Sect i on 7( a) ,Rul e141 of t heRul esofCourt ,had notbeen pai d;( 2)pet i t i onerf ai l ed t oatt ach a cert i ficat i onagai nstnonf orum shoppi ng;and
Provi si onsoft heRul esofCourtrequi ri nga cert i ficati on ofnonf orum or compl ai nt s and i ni t i at ory pl eadi ngs shoppi ng f , a wri t t en
( 3)pet i t i onerf ai l ed t o att ach a wri t t en expl anati on why t he money cl ai m wasnotfil edandservedpers onal l y.
expl anat i on f ornonpersonalse rvi ceand fil i ng,and t hepaymentof fil i ngf eesf ormoneycl ai msagai nstan est at ewoul d noti n anyway obst ruct probate procee di ngs,t hus,t hey are appl i cabl et o speci al proceedi ngssuchastheset t l ementoft heest at eofadeceasedper son asi nt hepre sentcase.
RTC assai l edOr deranddi smi sse dt hemoneycl ai m wi t houtpre j udi ce basedont hegr oundsabovest at edbyMe di na.
Onthei ssueofcert i ficati on ofnonf orum shoppi ng:
Shekkerthenfil edf praPet i t i on f orrevi ew oncert i orari .
equi r ed onl y f or The cer t i ficat i on of nonf or um s hoppi ng i s r compl ai nt sand otheri ni t i ator y pl eadi ngs .TheRTC err edi n rul i ng
’ scont i ngentmoneycl ai m agai nstt heest at ebe I ssue:MustShekker
t hatacont i ngentmoneycl ai m agai nstt heest at eofa decedenti san
di smi ssed f orhi sf ai l uret oat t ach t ohi smoti on acert i ficati on agai nst nonf or um shoppi ng?
i ni t i at ory pl eadi ng. I n t he pre sent case ,t he whol e pr obat e proceedi ng was i ni t i at ed upon t he fil i ng of the pet i t i on f or al l owanceofthedecedent' swi l l .UnderSect i ons1 and5,Rul e86 of
Rati o:No.
t he Rul es of Court , af t er grant i ng l et t er s of t est amentary or of admi ni st rat i on,al lpersonshavi ngmoneycl ai msagai nstt hedecedent aremandat edt ofil eornot i f ythecourtandt heest at eadmi ni st rat orof t hei rr espec t i ve money cl ai ms; ot herwi se, t hey woul d be barr ed, 5 subj ectt ocert ai nexcept i ons.
Thefil i ngofamoneycl ai m agai nstt hedecedent ’ sest at ei nt hepr obat e courti smandat ory. Toemphasi ze. .
Suchbei ngt hecase,amoneycl ai m agai nstanest at ei smor eaki nt oa
Speci alprovi si onsunderPartI Ioft heRul esofCourtgovern speci al 7
mot i on f or cr edi t or s' c l ai ms t o be r ecog ni ze d and t aken i nt o consi derati on i nt heproperdi sposi t i on oft hepropert i esoft heestate.
Under Sect i on 11,Rul e 13 oft he 1997 Rul es of Ci vi lProc edur e, personals i ng i st he generalrul e,and r esor tt o ot her e r v i c e and fil modes of ser vi ce and fil i ng, t he exc ept i on. Hencef ort h,whene ve r nt hel i ghtoft heci rcumst ances per sonals er vi c eorfil i ngi spr ac t i c abl e,i
A moneycl ai mi sonl yan i nci dent almat t eri nt hemai n act i on f ort he set t l ementoft hedecedent ' sestat e;moresoi ft hecl ai mi scont i ngent si ncethecl ai mantcannote ven i nst i t ut ea separat eact i on f oramer e
oft i me,pl aceandperson,personalservi ceorfil i ngi smandat y or y.Onl when per sonalser vi ceorfil i ngi snotpr act i cabl ema yr esor tt oot her mode s be had, whi ch must t hen be accompani ed by a wr i t t en expl anati on ast owhypersonalservi ceorfil i ngwasnotpract i cabl et o begi n wi t h.I n adj udgi ng t he pl ausi bi l i t y ofan expl anat i on,a cour t shal ll i kewi seconsi dert hei mport anceoft hesubj ectmatt eroft hecase orthei ssuesi nvol vedt herei n.
n peti t i oner s cont i ngent money cont i ngent cl ai m. Hence, herei ' cl ai m, not bei ng an i ni t i at ory pl eadi ng, does not r equi r e a cert i ficati on agai nstnonf orum shoppi ng .
I nt hepre sentcase,peti t i onerhol ds officei n Sal cedo Vi l l age,Makati Ci t y ,whi l ecounself orr espondentand t he RTC whi ch r ender ed t he assai l ed ordersarebot hi nI l i gan Ci t y.Thel owercourtshoul d have t aken j udi ci alnot i ce oft he greatdi st ance between sai d ci t i es and r eal i zed t hati ti si ndeed notpract i cabl etoserveand fil ethe money cl ai m personal l y.
Onthei ssueoffil i ngf ees:
The t r i alcour thas j ur i sdi ct i on t o acton a money cl ai m agai nstan est atef orservi cesrenderedbyal awyert ot headmi ni st rat ri xt oassi st her i nf ul fil l i ng her dut i es t ot he est at e eve n wi t hout payment of separatedocketf eesbecausethefil i ngf eesshal lconst i t ut ea l i en on t hej udgmentpur suantt oSect i on2,Rul e141oft heRul esofCourt ,or t he t ri alc our tmay or derthe paymentofsuch fil i ng f eeswi t hi na 9 r easonabl et i me. Af t er al l ,t he t ri al court had al r eady assumed j ur i sdi ct i onovert heact i onf orset t l eme ntoft heest at e.
Ther ul i ngspi r i toft hepr obat el aw i st hespeedyset t l eme ntofest at es ofdeceased personsf orthe benefitofcr edi t orsand t hoseent i t l ed t o r esi duebywayofi nheri t anceorl egacyaf t ert hedebtsandexpensesof admi ni st rat i onhavebeenpai d.
Cl earl y,t heref ore,nonpaymentoffil i ngf eesf oramoneycl ai m agai nst t heest at ei snotone oft hegrounds f ordi smi ssi ng a moneycl ai m agai nsttheestate.
TheRTC shoul d haver el axed and l i ber al l yconst r ued t hepr ocedur al rul e on t he r equi r ement of a wri t t en expl anat i on f or nonpersonal s e r vi c e ,ag ai ni nt h ei nt e r e s to fs ubs t a nt i alj us t i c e.
Onthei ssueofpersonalser vi ceandfil i ng:
servi ceand fil i ngarepref err ed f orobvi ousreasons.Pl ai nl y, Personal G. R.No.16680
such shoul d expedi t eact i on orre sol ut i on on a pl eadi ng,mot i on or otherpaper;andconversel y,mi ni mi ze,i fnotel i mi nate,del aysl i kel yto be i ncur r ed i f ser vi ce or fil i ng i s done by mai l , consi der i ng t he i neffici encyoft hepostalservi ce.
Sept ember13,1920
t i t i o ne r ,v s .DOLPH WI # 6- BROADWELL HAGANS,pe A SLI ZENUS, r espondent s. JudgeofFi r stI nst anceofCebu,ET AL. ,
8
ofest ateofadeceasedperson?
: JOHNSON,J.
Rul i ng:No.
Ori gi nalpet i t i on f orawri tofcerti orari . Fact sareadmi t t edbydemurrer . Judge Adol ph Wi sl i zenus ar gues t hatt he pr ovi si on ofActNo.190 permi thi mt oappoi ntassessorsi n" speci alproceedi ngs".
Rati o:I n proceedi ngsl i ke t hepresent ,t hej udgeoft heCourtofFi rst I nst ancei swi t houtaut hori t yt oappoi ntassessors.
Br oadwel l Hagans cont ends t hatno aut hor i t yi nl aw exi st sf orthe appoi nt mentofassessor si nsuchproceedi ngs.
Wefind,upon an exami nat i on ofsect i on 1ofActNo.190,whi ch gi ves us an i nt er pret at i on oft he words used i n sai d Act ,t hatt her ei sa di st i nct i on bet ween an " act i on"and a " speci alproceedi ng, "and t hat when t heLegi sl at ur eused t hewor d" act i on"i tdi d notme an " speci al proceedi ng. "
The onl y pr ovi si ons of l aw whi ch aut hor i z et he appoi nt me nt of assessorsarethef ol l owi ng; ( i on 5762 of Act No. 190appoi nt ment of asses sor si nt he a)Sect courtofj ust i ceofthepeace.
Act i on
( i ons 153161 of Act No. 190the onl y provi si ons ofl aw b)sect whi ch coul d, by any possi bi l i t y, per mi tt he appoi nt ment of
assessorsi n" speci alproceedi ngs
( )secti on44( i cabl et oMani l aonl y c a)ofActNo.267—appl
ordi narysui ti n a court eve ryot herr emedyf urni shedbyl aw efinedasan appl i cat i on orprocee di ng d ofj us t i c e f or maldemand ofone' s t o est abl i sh t he st at us or ri ght of a
l egalri ght si n acourtof j ust i ce i n t he manner presc ri bed by t hecourt orby t he l aw.I ti st he met hod ofappl yi ngl egal r emedi es accor di ng t o defini t e es t abl i shed rul es.
( i on2477 ofActNo.2711—appl i cabl et oMani l aonl y d)sect ( )sect i on 2 ofActNo.2369-appoi nt mentofasse ssor si n cr i mi nal e casesonl y Sect i on 154 provi des t hat" ei t herpart yt o an act i on may appl yi n wr i t i ngt ot hej udgef orassessor st osi ti nt het r i al .Upon t hefil i ngof suchappl i cati on,t hej udgeshal ldi rectt hatassessorsbeprovi ded,... . " I ssue:I sa j udgeoft heCFI ,i n speci alpr oceedi ngs,aut hori zedunder
t he l aw t o appoi nt as sessor s t o fix t he amount due an admi ni st rat or/execut orf orhi sservi cesandexpensesi nt heset t l ement 9
Speci alPr oceedi ng
par t y ,o rapar t i c ul arf ac t . Usual l y ,i n speci al procee di ngs, no f ormal pl eadi ngs are requi r ed, unl ess t he st atut e expres sl y so provi des.The r emedy i n spec i al pr oce edi ngs i s gener al l ygrant ed upon an appl i cat i on or mot i on. I l l ust r at i ons of speci al proceedi ngs, i n cont radi st i nct i on t o act i ons,may begi ven:Proceedi ngsf or t he appoi nt ment ofan admi ni st r at or , guardi ans,tutors;cont estofwi l l s;t o perpet uat et es t i mony; t o change t he name of per sons; appl i cat i on f or admi ssi on t othebar,et c. ,et c.
Ther ef or e,t hedemur r eri sover r ul ed and t hepr ayeroft hepet i t i on i s grant ed,and i ti sorderedand decre ed t hatt heor deroft heJudge Wi sl ezenusappoi nt i ngt heassessor sdescr i bed i nt hepet i t i on beand t hesamei sannul l edandsetasi de.
•
RTC deni edthemot i onf ordi smi ssaloft hepr oceedi ng.
•
CAl i kewi sedi smi ssedt hepet i t i on.
I SSUE:
Whet herornott hepr oceedi ngi sanor di naryci vi lact i on. CaseDi ges tbyCLARI SSE RULI NG:
No. CaseNo.7-Vda.DeManal ovsCA
Pet i t i onersmaynotval i dl ytakeref ugeundert heprovi si onsofRul e1, Secti on 2,oft heRul esofCourtt oj ust i f ythei nvocati on ofArt i cl e222 oft heCi vi lCode( Nosui tshal lbefil edormai nt ai nedbet ween membersoft hesamef ami l yunl essi tshoul dappeart hatearnest effort st owar dacompromi sehavebeenmade,butt hatt hesamehave f ai l e d,s ubj e c tt ot hel i mi t a t i o nsi nAr t i c l e2035)f o rt hedi s mi s s alo f t hepe t i t i o n.
FACTS:
Tr oadi oManal o,ar esi dentofMani l adi ed i nt est at e.Hewassur vi ved by •
hi swi f e,Pi l arS.Manal o,andhi s11chi l drenwhoareal lofl egalage.
TheAr t i cl e222i sappl i cabl eonl yt oor di nar yci vi lact i ons.Thi si scl ear f rom t het erm sui tt hati tref erst oanact i on byonepers on orpersons agai nstanot herorot her si n a courtofj ust i cei n whi ch t hepl ai nt i ff pur suest her emedywhi ch t hel aw affor dshi mf ort her edr essofan i nj uryort heenf orcementofari ght ,whet heratl aw ori n equi t y. A ci vi l acti on i st husan acti on fil edi nacourtofj ust i ce,wherebyapart ysues anot herf ort heenf orcementofari ght ,ort hepreventi on orredressofa wr ong.
Tr oadi oManal ol ef tsever alr ealpr oper t i esl ocat ed i n Mani l aand i nt he •
prov i nceofTar l ac i ncl udi ng a busi nessundert he name and st yl e Manal osMachi neShop. •
Respondent swhoare8oft hesurvi vi ngchi l dren fil edapet i t i onwi t ht he RTCf orthej udi ci alset t l ementoft heest ateoft hei rl atef at her ,Troadi o Manal o and f ort heappoi nt mentoft hei rbrot her ,RomeoManal o,as admi ni st rator .
•
I tmustbeemphasi zedthatt hepet i t i onersar enotbei ngsuedf orany causeofacti on asi nf actnodef endantwasi mpl eaded.ThePet i t i on f or I ssuanceofLet t ersofAdmi ni st rat i on,Set t l ementand Di st ri but i on of Est at ei saspeci alpr oceedi ngand,assuch,i ti sare medywher ebyt he
Pet i t i oner s fil ed a mot i on f or out ri ght di smi ssal of t he proceedi ng cont endi ng t hatthe pr oceedi ng i s act ual l y an ordi nary ci vi lact i on i nvol vi ngmembersoft hesamef ami l y.
10
pet i t i onerstherei n seek t oest abl i sh a st atus,ari ght ,ora part i cul ar f act. Thepri vater espondent smerel yseekt oestabl i sh t hef actofdeath oft hei rf at herand subsequentl yt obedul yrec ogni zedasamongthe hei rsoft hesai ddeceased sot hatt heycan val i dl yexerci sethei rri ght t o part i ci patei nt heset t l ementand l i qui dati on oft heest ateoft he decedentconsi st entwi t ht he l i mi t ed and speci alj uri sdi ct i on oft he pr obatec ourt .
deceased. •
CAr eve r sedt heRTC rul i ng. I SSUE:
Whet herornott heRTC act i ngasacour tofgener alj ur i sdi ct i on i n an act i on f or r ec onve yance and annul ment of t i t l e wi t h damage s, adj udi cat e mat t er sr el at i ng t ot he set t l ement of t he est at e of a deceased.
CaseNo.8 Nat chervsCA
RULI NG: FACTS:
No. •
SpousesGr aci ano delRosar i o and Gr aci ana Esguerr a wer er egi st er ed Ther el i es a mar ked di st i nct i on bet ween an act i on and a speci al procee di ng.An act i on i sa f ormaldemand ofonesri ghti n a courtof j ust i cei nt hemannerpr escr i bedbyt hecour torbyt hel aw.Thet er m speci alprocee di ngmaybedefined asan appl i cat i on orprocee di ngt o establ i shthestat usorri ghtofaparty ,oraparti cul arf act .
ownersofaparcelofl and. •
Upon t he deat h ofGr aci ana,Gr aci ano t oge t herwi t h hi s 6 chi l dre n ent er ed i nt o an ext raj udi ci al set t l ement of Gr aci ana’ s est at e adj udi cat i ngandanddi vi di ngamongt hemsel vest her ealpropert y.
•
Appl yi ngt hesepr i nci pl es,an act i on f orr econveyanceand annul me nt oft i t l e wi t h damages i s a ci vi lact i on,wher eas mat t er sr el ati ng t o set t l ementoft heest at eofadeceasedper son suchasadvancementof proper t y made by t he decedent ,par t ake oft he nat ur e ofaspeci al proceedi ng,whi ch concomi t ant l yr equi re st he appl i cat i on ofspeci fic rul esasprovi dedf ori nt heRul esofCourt .
Graci ano marri ed peti t i oner Patr i ci a Natc her .Duri ng t hei r marri age, nd
Graci anosol dthe2 l o to ft hepr o pe r t ybyt ohi swi f ePat r i c i a. •
Graci anodi edl eavi nghi ssecondwi f ePatr i ci aandhi ssi xchi l drenbyhi s firstmarri age,ashei rs.
•
Pri vat erespondent sfil edf orannul mentoft i t l eandr econveyanceoft he Cl earl y,matt erswhi chi nvol vesett l ementanddi st ri but i on oft heestat e oft hedecedentf al lwi t hi nt heexcl usi veprovi nceoft heprobat ecourt i nt heex er c i s eo fi t sl i mi t e dj ur i s di c t i o n. Co r ol l ar i l y ,t h eRTC,ac t i ngi n i t sgeneralj uri sdi cti on,i sdevoi dofaut hori t ytorenderan adj udi cat i on and r esol vet hei ssueofadvancementoft herealpr opert yi nf avorof her ei n peti t i onerNat cher ,i nasmuch ast heci vi lcasef orreconveyance and annul mentoft i t l e wi t h damagesi s nott he properve hi cl et o
pr opert y bef oret heRTC.Theyal l eged t hatpet i t i onerNatc her ,upon Gr aci anosdeat h,t hr ough t heempl oymentoff r aud,mi sr epres ent at i on and f org ery ,acqui r edt hepr oper t ybymaki ngi tappeart hatGr aci ano execut edaDeedofSal e. •
RTC rul ed i nf avorpet i t i onerNatc herst at i ng t hatt hepr opert yi san advance i nher i t ance of Nat cher bei ng a compul sor y hei r of t he 11
t hre sh out sai d quest i on.Mor eov er ,t he RTC was not pr oper l y const i t ut edasa pr obatecourtsoast oval i dl ypassupon t hequest i on ofadvancementmadebyt hedecedentGraci anot opet i t i onerNat cher .
Ful e fil ed a spe ci al appear ance t o ques t i on Venue and
•
Jur i sdi ct i onoft heCFIQuez onCi t y . •
CFIQuezonCi t yi ssuedanordergr ant i ngGarci a’ s" Ur gent Pet i t i on f orAuthori t ytoPayEst ateObl i gat i ons"i nt hatt he payment sweref ort hebenefitoft heest at eandthatt her ehangs acl oudofdoubton t heval i di t yoft heproceedi ngsoft heCFI Laguna.
CaseNo.9 Ful evsCA •
FACTS: •
Ful ei nst i t ut edapet i t i on t oannult heproceedi ngsbef oreCFI QuezonCi t y .
Vi r gi ni a G.Ful e fil ed wi t ht he CFIofLaguna,atCal amba a
I SSUES:
pet i t i on f or l et t er s ofadmi ni st rat i on,al l egi ng t hat Amado G. Garc i a,a propert yownerofCal amba,Laguna,di ed i nt est at ei n t heCi t yofMani l a,l eavi ngrealest ateandpersonalpropert i esi n Laguna, and i n ot her pl aces, wi t hi nt he j uri sdi ct i on of t he Court . CFIj udgegr ant edthemot i on.
Whet herornott hevenuei si mpr oper l yl ai dout . RULI NG:
Yes. •
•
•
Pr eci osaB.Garci afil edan opposi t i on rai si ngt hatt hevenuewas i mproperl yl ai dandf orl ackofj uri sdi cti on.
Sect i on 1,Rul e73 speci fical l ythecl ause" sof arasi tdependson t he pl aceofresi denceofthedecedent ,oroft hel ocati on oft heestate, "i si n r eal i t y a mat t er of venue, as t he capt i on of t he Rul ei ndi cat es: " Set t l ement ofEst at e ofDeceased Persons.Venue and Process es.“I t coul dnothavebeeni nt endedt odefinet hej uri sdi ct i onovert hesubj ect matt er ,becausesuchl egalprovi si on i scont ai nedi nal aw ofprocedur e deal i ng mer el y wi t h proc edur al mat t er s. Proc edur ei s one t hi ng; j ur i sdi ct i onovert hesubj ectmat t eri sanot her .
CFIl agunadenyt heopposi t i onofGarci a. CA annul l ed t he pr oce edi ngs bef or e CFI Laguna f or l ack of j ur i sdi ct i on.
•
Ful eappeal edtot heSC.
•
Meanwhi l e,Garci a fil ed a pet i t i on f orl et t ersofadmi ni st rat i on
Thepl aceofr esi denceoft hedeceasedi nset t l eme ntofest at es,pr obat e ofwi l l ,andi ssuanceofl et t ersofadmi ni str ati on doesnotconst i t ut ean el ementofj uri sdi cti on overthesubj ectmatt er .I ti smerel yconst i t ut i ve ofvenue.
bef or et he CFIQuez on Ci t y over t he same i nt est at e est at e of AmadoG.Gar ci a. •
CFIQuezon Ci t y gr ant ed t he mot i on and appoi nt ed Gar ci a as speci aladmi ni st rati xoft heest ate.
Thet er m" r esi des"me anst heper sonal ,act ualorphysi calhabi t at i onof 12
aper son,act ualr esi denceorpl aceofabode.Thet er m meansmer el y
Dec ember28,1956|Concepci on
r esi dence, that i s, per sonal r esi dence, not l egal resi dence or Facts:
domi ci l e.Resi dencesi mpl yrequi resbodi l ypre senceasani n nhab i t anti agi venpl ace,whi l edomi ci l erequi resbodi l ypresencei nt hatpl aceand
Pet i t i onerEugeni oEusebi ofil edwi t ht heCFIofRi zalapet i t i on f orhi s appoi nt ment as admi ni st r at or of t he est at e of hi sf at her , Andres Eusebi o.Heal l egedt hathi sf at her ,whodi edon November28,1952, r esi ded i n Quezon Ci t y.Eugeni o’ s si bl i ngs ( Amanda,Vi r gi ni a,Juan, Del fin,Vi cent eandCarl os) ,stat i ngthatt heyarei l l egi t i mat echi l drenof Andr es,opposedt hepet i t i on andal l egedt hatAndr eswasdomi ci l edi n San Fer nando,Pampanga.Theypray ed t hatt he cas ebe di smi ss ed upon t hegr oundthatv enuehadbeeni mproperl yl ai d.
al soani nt ent i on t omakei tone' sdomi ci l e.Nopart i cul arl engthoft i me ofr esi dencei srequi r edt hough;howeve r ,t heresi dencemustbemore t hant emporary . TheCour tr ul et hatt hel astpl aceofr esi denceoft hedeceasedAmado G.Gar ci awasat11CarmelAvenue,CarmelSubdi vi si on,Quez onCi t y , andnot atCal amba,Laguna.A deat h cert i ficat ei sadmi ssi bl et oprov e t heresi denceoft hedecedentatt heti meofhi sdeat h.Asi ti s,t he deat h cer t i ficateofAmadoG.Garci a,whi chwaspr esent edi nevi dence byVi r gi ni aG.Ful eher sel fandal sobyPr eci osaB.Gar ci a,showst hat hi sl astpl ace ofr esi dencewas atQuezon Ci t y.Asi de f rom t hi s,t he deceased' sresi dencecert i ficat ef or1973 obt ai nedt hre emont hsbef ore hi s deat h;t he Mar ket i ng Agr ee mentand PowerofAt t or ney dat ed t urni ngovert headmi ni st rat i on ofhi stwoparc el sofsugarl andt ot he Cal ambaSugarPl ant er sCooperat i veMarket i ngAssoci ati on,I nc. ;t he DeedofDonati on,t ransf erri ngpartofhi si nt eresti ncert ai n parcel sof l and i n Cal amba,Laguna t o Agust i na B.Gar ci a;and cer t i ficat esof t i t l es cove ri ng par cel s of l and i n Cal amba, Laguna, show i n bol d document st hat Amado G.Gar ci a' sl astpl aceofr es i dence was at Quez on Ci t y . Wi t hal ,t he concl usi on becomes i mper at i ve t hat t he venuef orVi r gi ni a C.Ful e' spet i t i on f orl et t er sofadmi ni st r at i on was i mproperl yl ai di nt heCourtofFi rs tI nst anceofCal amba,Laguna.
TheCFIofRi z algr ant edEugeni o’ spet i t i on andover r ul edhi ssi bl i ngs’ obj ecti on. I ssue:Whet herv enuehadbeen pr oper l yl ai di nRi zal ? Hel d:No.Don Andr esEuse bi oup t oOct ober29,1952,wasand had al waysbee ndomi ci l edi nSan Fer nando,Pampanga.Heonl yboughta houseand l otat889A EspanaExt ensi on,Quez on Ci t ybecausehi s son, Dr . Jes us Euse bi o, who t r eat ed hi m, r es i ded at No. 41 P. Fl orenti noSt . ,QuezonCi t y.Evenbef orehewasabl etot ransf ert ot he househebought ,Andressuffer edast r okeandwasf orc edt ol i vei nhi s son’ s re si dence. I ti s wel l se t t l ed t hat “domi ci l ei s not commonl y changedbypr esencei n a pl acemer el yf oroneown’ sheal t h”e ven i f coupl edwi t h“ knowl edgethatonewi l lneve ragai n beabl e,on account ofi l l ness,t o re t urn home.Havi ng re si ded f oroverseventyyearsi n Pampanga,t hepresumpt i oni st hatAndresr et ai nedsuchdomi ci l e.
CaseDi ges tbyJAZZ CaseNo.10-Eusebi ovs.Eusebi o
I nt hematt eroft heI nt est ateoft hedeceasedAndr esEusebi o.Eugeni o Eusebi o, pet i t i oner and appel l ee, vs. Amanda Eusebi o, Vi r gi ni a Eusebi o,Juan Eusebi o,etal . ,opposi t orsandappel l ant s.
Andr eshadnoi nt ent i on ofst ayi ngi n Quez onCi t yper manent l y .Ther e i s no di r ectev i dence ofs uch i nt ent– Andresdi d notmani f esthi s desi r et ol i ve i n Quezon Ci t yi ndefini t el y; Eugeni o di d not t est i f y t her eon;and Dr .JesusEusebi o wasnotpr esent ed t ot est i f yon t he 13
mat t er . Andr es di d not part wi t h, or al i enat e, hi s house i n San Fer nando, Pampanga. Some of hi s chi l dr en r emai ned i n t hat muni ci pal i t y.I nt hedeedofsal eofhi shouseat889 –A EspanaExt . , Andr esgaveSan Fer nando,Pampanga,ashi sr esi dence.Themar r i age cont r actsi gnedbyAndreswhen hewasmarr i ed i n art i cul omort i st o Concepci on Vi l l anueva two days pri or t o hi s deat h st at ed t hat hi s r esi dencei sSan Fer nando,Pampanga.
MALI G,pl ai nt i ffsappel l ant s, vs. MARI ASANTOSBUSH,def endant appel l ee . On Sept ember19,1962thepl ai nt i ffsfil edthecompl ai nt ,al l egi ngt hat t heywer et heacknowl edged nat uralchi l drenandtheonl yhei rsi nt he di r ectl i ne oft he decease d John T.Bush,havi ng been born oft he commonl aw re l ati onshi poft hei rf atherwi t hApol oni aPer ezf rom 1923 upt oAugust ,1941;
Ther equi si t esf orachangeofdomi ci l ei ncl ude( 1)capaci t yt ochoose and f r eedom ofchoi ce,( 2)physi calpresenceatt hepl ace chosen,( 3) i nt ent i on t ost aytherei n permanent l y.Al t hough Andr escompl i edwi t h t he firstt wo r equi si t es,t her ei s no change ofdomi ci l e because t he t hi r dr e qui s i t ei sabs e nt .
t hats ai dJohn T.Bush andApol oni aPer ez,duri ngt heconcept i on of t he pl ai nt i ffs,wer e notsuffer i ng f r om any di sabi l i t yt o marr y each other;thatt hedef endant ,byf al sel yal l egi ngthatshewast hel egalwi f e oft hedeceasedwasabl et osecur eherappoi nt mentasadmi ni st r at ri x oft heest at eoft hedeceased i n Test at ePr oceedi ngsNo.29932 oft he CourtofFi rs tI nst anceofMani l a;t hatshesubmi t t ed t othe courtf or appr ovalaproj ectofpart i t i on,purport i ngt oshow t hatt hedeceased l ef tawi l lwher ebyhebequeathed hi sest at et othreepersons,namel y: Mar i a Sant os Bush, Ani t a S. Bush and Anna Ber ger ;t hat t he def endantt henknew t hatt hepl ai nt i ffswer et heacknowl edgednat ur al chi l dre n oft he decease d;and t hatt hey di sco ve r ed t he f r aud and mi sr epresent ati onperpet rat edbythedef endantonl yi nJul y,1962.
Anent t he cont ent i on t hat appel l ant s submi t t ed t hems el ves t ot he aut hori t yoft heCFIofRi zalbecauset heyi nt r oduced evi denceon t he resi denceoft hedecedent ,i tmustbenot edt hatappel l ant sspeci fical l y made ofr ec or dt hat t hey wer e NOT submi t t i ng t hemse l ve st ot he j ur i sdi ct i on oft hecour t ,exceptf ort hepur poseonl yofassai l i ngt he same. I n sum,t he Cour tf ound t hatAndre swas,att het i meofhi sdeat h, domi ci l edi n San Fernando,Pampanga;t hatt he CFIofRi zalhad no aut hori t y,t heref ore,t o appoi ntan admi ni st rat oroft he est ateoft he deceased,t hevenuehavi ngbeen l ai di mpr oper l y.
Theypray edt hatt hepr oj ectofpart i t i on beannul l edon t hegroundof f r aud and mi sr epres ent at i on on t hepartoft hedef endant ,whoknew t hather ei n pl ai nt i ffsweret heacknowl edged nat uralchi l dren oft he decedent ;
Doct ri ne:Domi ci l eonceacqui r ed i sret ai ned unt i la new domi ci l ei s gai ned.I ti snotchangedbypr esencei napl acef orone’ sownheal t h. CaseNo.11
Thedef endantmo ved t odi smi ss,al l egi ngl ack ofcauseofact i on,r es j udi cat a and st at ut e ofl i mi t at i ons.The pl ai nt i ffs opposed and t he def endantfil ed a r epl yt ot he opposi t i on.On January10,1963 t he l owercourtdeni ed t hemot i on,“ i tappeari ngthatt hegrounds upon whi chsai dmo t i oni sbasedar enoti ndubi t abl e. ”I nt i me ,t hedef endant
G. R.No.L-22761 ROSE BUSH MALI G and JOE,THOMAS,and JOHN al lsur named BUSH,r epres ent edi nt hi ssui tbythei rat t orneyi nf act ,ROSE BUSH 14
fil ed heranswerspeci fical l ydenyi ngal lt hemat eri alaverment soft he compl ai ntand i nvoki ngl aches,resj udi cataand st atut eofl i mi t ati ons asaffir mat i vedef enses.
Sect i on1ofRul e8enumer at est hegr oundsupon whi chan act i onmay bedi smi ssed,and i tspeci fical l yor dai nst hatamo t i on t ot hi send be fil ed.I nt hel i ghtoft hi sexpressr equi rementwedonotbel i evethatt he courthadpowert odi smi sst hecasewi t houtt herequi si t emot i on dul y prese nt ed.Thef actt hatt hepart i esfil edmemorandaupon t hecourt ’ s i ndi cat i on ororderi n whi ch t heydi scussed t hepr oposi t i on t hatt he act i on was unnec es sar y and was i mpr oper l y br ought out si de and i ndependent l yoft hecasef orl i beldi d notsuppl yt hedefici ency.Rul e 30 oft heRul esofCourtprovi desf ort hecasesi nwhi chan act i on may bedi smi ssed,andt hei ncl usi onoft hoset her ei npr ovi dedexcl udesany other,undert hef ami l i armaxi ms,i ncl usi ouni usestexcl usi voul t eri us. The onl yi nst ance i n whi ch,accor di ng t o sai d Rul es,t he cour tma y di smi ssupon t hecourt ’ sown mot i on an act i on i s,when t he‘ pl ai nt i ff f ai l stoappearatt heti meofthet ri alort oprosecut ehi sacti on f oran unr easonabl el engthoft i meort ocompl ywi t ht heRul esoranyorder oft hecourt .
Thedef endantfil edamot i on t odi smi ss,chal l engi ngt hej uri sdi ct i on of t hecourt ,st ati ngthatsi ncetheact i on wasonet oannulaproj ectof part i t i on dul yapprov ed by t heprobatecourti twas t hatcourtal one whi ch coul dt akecogni zanceoft hecase,ci t i ngRul e75,Sect i on 1,of t heRul esofCourt .OnOct ober31,1963 TRI AL COURT:gr ant ed t hemot i on and di smi ssed t hecompl ai nt ,not on t heground r el i ed upon by t hedef endantbutbecausetheact i on hadpresc ri bed. Thepl ai nt i ffsmovedt oreconsi derbutwer et urneddown;hence,t hi s appeal . I SSUE:Mayt hel owercourtdi smi ssanact i on on agroundnotal l eged i nt hemot i ont odi smi ss?
Al t hough a mo t i on t o di smi ss had been pr esent ed def endant t he r esol ut i on oft he courtgr ant i ng t he samewasbasedupon a gr ound notal l egedi n sai d mot i on.Butassumi ngthatt hel owercourtc oul d proper l yconsi dert hequest i on ofprescri pti on anew,t hesamesti l ldi d notappear t o be i ndubi t abl e on t he f ace oft he al l egat i ons i nt he compl ai nt .
I tmustberememberedthatt hefirstmot i ont odi smi ss,al l egi ngl ackof cause ofact i on,r es j udi cat a and st atut e ofl i mi t at i ons,was deni ed becauset hosegr oundsdi d notappeart ot hecour tt obei ndubi t abl e. Thesecond mot i on r ei t er at ed noneoft hosegr oundsand r ai sed onl y thequesti on ofj uri sdi cti on.
Thedef endantci t esAr t i cl e137 oft heCi vi lCode,whi ch pr ovi dest hat an act i on f orac knowl edgmentofnat ur alchi l dre n maybecommenced onl yduri ngthel i f et i meoft heput ati veparent s,excepti nt woi nst ances notobtai ni ngi nt hi scase,andt hatt hepr esentact i onwascommenced af t er t he death oft he put at i ve f at her oft he pl ai nt i ffs.The sai d provi si on i snotofi ndubi t abl eappl i cati on,si ncethepl ai nt i ffsdonot seekacknowl edgmentbutal l egeasa matt eroff actt hatt hey“ aret he acknowl edged nat uralchi l dr en and t heonl yhei rsi nt hedi r ectl i neof t hel ateJohn T.Bush. ”Whet herornott hi sal l egati on i str uewi l l ,of course ,dependupont heevi dencet obepr esent edatt het ri al .
I ndi smi ssi ngt hecompl ai ntupon agroundnotr el i edupon,t hel ower courti n effectdi d so mot u propri o,wi t houtoffer i ng t he pl ai nt i ffsa chancetoar guethe poi nt .I nf actt hecourtdi d noteven st at ei ni t s orderwhy i ni t sopi ni on t heact i on had presc ri bed,andwhy i n effect , wi t houtanyevi denceornew ar gume nt sont hequest i on,i tr ever sedi t s previ ousrul i ngt hatt hegroundofprescri pti on wasnoti ndubi t abl e. I n Mani l aHeral dPubl i shi ngCo. ,I nc.vs.Ramos,e tal . ,88Phi l .94,i t washel d: 15
Wi t hout pr ej udi ce t o what ever def enses ma y be avai l abl et ot he def endant ,t hi sCourtbel i evesthatt hepl ai nt i ffs’causeshoul dnotbe f orecl osedwi t houtaheari ngon t hemeri t s.
The def endanti nsi st si nt hi si nst ance on t he j ur i sdi ct i onalgr ound posedi nhermot i on t odi smi ss,ci t i ngRul e75,Secti on 1,oft heRul es ofCourtf ormer l yi nf orce( now Rul e73,Sect i on1) ,whi chsays:
WHEREFORE,t he or der s appeal ed f r om ar e setasi de and t he case r emanded f or f urt her proc eedi ngs. Cost s agai nst t he def endant appel l eei nt hi si nstance.
SECTION 1.Wher eest ateofdeceasedpers onsset t l ed.–I ft hedecedent i san i nhabi t antoft hePhi l i ppi nesatt heti meofhi sdeath,whet hera ci t i zen oran al i en,hi swi l lshallbeproved,orl et t ersofadmi ni st rati on grant ed,and hi sestat esett l ed,i nt heCourtofFi rstI nst ancei nt he provi ncei n whi ch heresi des att heti meofhi sdeath,and i fhei san i nhabi t antofaf orei gn count ry ,t he CourtofFi rs tI nst ance ofany provi ncei n whi ch hehad est at e.Thecourtfirstt aki ngcogni zanceof thesett l ementoftheestateofadecedent ,shallexerci sej uri sdi cti on t o t heexcl usi on ofal lot hercourt s.Thej uri sdi ct i on assumedbyacourt , sof arasi tdependson t hepl aceofresi denceoft hedecedent ,oroft he l ocat i on ofhi sestat e,shal lnotbe cont est ed i n a sui torproceedi ng, excepti n an appealf r om t hatcourt ,i nt heori gi nalcase,orwhen t he wantofj ur i sdi ct i onappear sont her ecor d
CaseNo.12
TOMASJI MENEZvsI AC FACTS:
I twi l lbenot edt hatt hef oregoi ngrul efixesj uri sdi ct i on f orpurposesof t hespeci alproceedi ng f orthe set t l ementoft heest at eofadeceased per son,“ sof arasi tdependson t hepl aceofr esi denceoft hedecedent , oroft hel ocat i on ofhi sestat e. ”Thematt err eal l yconcernsvenue,as t hecapti on ofRul eci t ed i ndi cat es,and i n ordert oprecl ude di ffer ent court swhi chmayproper l yassumej uri sdi ct i onf r om doi ngso,t heRul e speci fiest hat“ t hecourtfirstt aki ngcogni zanceoft heset t l ementoft he estateofadecedent ,shal lexerci sej uri sdi cti on t ot heexcl usi on ofal l othercourt s. ”
Li no Ji menez mar r i ed co nsol aci on Ungson wi t h whom he begot4 chi l dren,namel y;Al bert o,Leonardo,Jr . ,Al ej andra Angel es.Duri ng such marr i age,Li noacqui r ed5 par cel sofl and i n Pangasi nan.When Consol aci on di ed,l i no cont r act ed a second marr i agewi t h Genoveva Caol boy wi t h whom hebegott he7 pet i t i oner sher ei n.Af t erLi noand Genoveva' sdeath,Vi r gi ni a( 2nd Marri age)fil ed a pet i t i on bef oreCFI prayi ng t o be appoi nt ed as admi ni st r at i x of t he propert i es of t he dece ase dspouse sLi no and Genove vaupon whi chLeonardoJi menez , j r .fil ed a mot i on f orexcl usi on ofhi sf at her ' snameand t hoseofhi s uncl e and auntscont endi ng t hatt hey haveal r eady r ece i ve dt hei r i nheri t ance consi st i ng of5 parc el s ofl and.However ,t he pet i t i on of Vi r gi ni a wher ei n she i ncl uded t he sai d 5 par cel s of l and i nt he i nvent oryoft heest at eofSps.Li no& Genoveva.
I nt hefinalanal ysi sthi sact i on i snotnecessari l y onetoannult he part i t i on al r eady made and appr ove d by t he probat e court ,and t o r eopen t heest at eproceedi ngsot hatanew part i t i onmaybemade,but f orrecoverybythepl ai nt i ffsoft heporti on ofthei ral l eged i nheri t ance ofwhi ch,t hroughf raud,t heyhavebeendepri ved.
Consequent l y,Leonardo moved f ort he excl usi on oft hose propert i es f r om t hei nvent orycont endi ngt hatsuch par cel sofl and wer eal r eady adj udi cat ed t o hi sf at her and t o hi s uncl e and aunt s.The probat e courtorderedtheexcl usi on of5parc el sofl andanddeni edt hemot i on f orrecon.fil ed by Vi rgi ni a.The l att erwentt o CA on a pet i t i on f or 16
cert i arariandpr ohobi t i on seeki ngtheannul kmentoft heordersoft he pr obatecourt ,ofwhi cht heCAdi smi ssed.
pronouncementby sai d courtas t ot i t l ei snotconcl usi veand coul d st i l lbeatt acedi naseparat eproceedi ng.
Subsequentl y ,t he pet i t i oner sfil ed an amended compl ai ntbef oret he RTC t orecov erpossessi on/owner shi p oft he5 par cel sofl and aspart oft heest at eofLi noandGenoveva.Pri vat ere spondent smovedf ort he di smi ssaloft hecompl ai ntont hegroundst hatt heact i on wasbarr ed by pr i orj udgme ntand pr escr i pt i on and l aches.Ther eaf t er ,t he Tr i al Courtdi ssmi edthecompl ai ntont hegroundofr esj udi cata.
I ndeed,t hegroundsrel i eduponbypri vat erespondent si nt hei rmot i on t o di smi ssdo notappeart o be i ndubi t abl e.Resj udi cat a has been shown t o be unavai l abl e and t he ot hergr ounds ofpr esc r i pt i on and l achesbypri vater espondent sareseri ousl ydi sput ed.
CaseDi ges tbyDATS
I SSUE: W/N i n a set t l eme ntpr oceedi ng( t est at eori nt est at e)t hel owercour t hasj uri sdi ct i ont odeci deonquest i onsofownershi p
#13
–
PURI TA
t i t i one r , ALI PI O,pe
vs. COURT OF APPEALS and ROMEO G.JARI NG,r epr es ent ed by hi s
W/N t hepet i t i oner s'pr esentact i on f ort her ecoveryofpossessi on and ownershi poft he5parcel sofl andi sbarredbyresj udi cata
At t or neyI nFactRAMON G.JARI NG, respondents. Fact:
RULI NG:
Res pondentRomeoJar i ng1 wasthel ess eeofa14. 5 hect ar efishpond i nBari t o,Mabuco,Her mosa,Bat aan.Thel easewasf oraperi odoffive year sendi ngonSept ember12,1990.OnJune19,1987,hesubl eased t he fishpond,f ort he r emai ni ng peri od ofhi sl ease,t ot he spouses Pl aci do and Pur i t aAl i pi o and t he spousesBi enveni do and Remedi os Manuel .Thest i pul at ed amountofr entwasP 485, 600. 00,payabl ei n t wo i nst al l ment s of P300, 000. 00 and P185, 600. 00, wi t ht he sec ond i nst al l mentf al l i ngdueon June30,1989.Each oft hef oursubl essees si gnedthecont ract .
Pet i t i oners'acti on wasappropri atel yfil edbecauseasageneralrul e,a pr obatecourtcan onl ypassupon quest i onsoft i t l eprovi si onal l y.The Pat ent r eason i st he probate court ' sl i mi t ed j uri sdi ct i on and t he pri nci pl ethatquesti onsoft i t l eorownershi p,whi chresul ti ni ncl usi on orexl usi on f rom t hei nvent oryoft heproperty ,can onl ybeset t l edi na separat eact i on.I thasbeen hel dt hati n a speci alproceedi ngf orthe pr obateofawi l l ,t hequest i on ofowners hi pi san ext raneousmatt er whi ch t he pr obat e cour t cannot r esol ve wi t h final i t y . Thi s pr onouncement no doubt appl i es wi t h equal f or ce t o i nt es t at e pr oceedi ngsasi nt hecaseatbar .
Thefir sti nst al l me ntwasdul ypai d,butoft hesecondi nst al l me nt ,t he subl esseesonl ysat i sfied aport i on t her eof ,l eavi ngan unpai d bal ance ofP50, 600. 00.Despi t eduedemand,t hesubl esse esf ai l ed t o compl y wi t ht hei robl i gat i on,sot hat ,onOct ober13,1989,pr i vat er espondent sued t he Al i pi o and Manuelspousesf ort he col l ect i on oft he sai d amount bef or et he Regi onal Tr i al Cour t , Br anch 5, Di nal upi han,
xi stbecauseoft hedi ffer encei nt hecausesof Re sj udi c a t a,doesnote acti on.Theotheracti onwasf ortheset t l ementoft hei nt est ateest ateof Li no and Genovev a whi l et heot heronewasan act i on f orr eco ve ryof possessi on andowners hi poft he5parce l sofl and.Moreover ,whi l et he CFI had j uri sdi ct i on, t he same was mer el y l i mi t ed. Any 17
Bataan.I nt heal t ernati ve,heprayedf ortheresci ssi on oft hesubl ease cont ractshoul dthedef endant sf ai lt opaythebal ance. Pet i t i onermoved t odi smi sst hecaseont hegr oundthatherhusband,Pl aci doal i pi o,had passedaway .Hence,t hecaseshoul dbefil edi nt heprobatecourt .
t est at e. Pri vat er espondent cannot short ci r cui t thi s procedure by l umpi nghi scl ai m agai nstt heAl i pi oswi t ht hoseagai nstt heManuel s consi deri ngt hat,asi def rom pet i t i oner’ sl ack ofaut hori t yt orepresent t hei rconj ugalestat e,t hei nvent oryoft heAl i pi os’conj ugalpropert yi s necessarybef oreanycl ai m chargeabl eagai nsti tcan bepai d.Needl ess t osay,suchpowerexcl usi vel ypert ai nstothecourthavi ngj uri sdi ct i on overt heset t l ementoft hedecedent ’ sest ateandnott oanyothercourt .
Issue: #14 – I N THE MATTER OF THE I NTESTATE ESTATE OF
Can t hecr edi t orsuethesurvi vi ngspouseofadecedenti nan ordi nary pr oceedi ngf ort hecol l ect i on ofasum ofmoneychargeabl eagai nstt he conj ugalpart nershi p?
DECEASED I SMAEL REYES, THE HEI RS OF OSCAR
R.
REYES ,e p t i t i oner s,
vs. CESAR R.REYES,respondent. Fact:
Hel d:
SpousesI smaelReyesandFel i saRevi t aReyesar et her egi st er edowners of parce l s of l and si t uat ed i n Ar ayat St r eet , Cubao, Quez on Ci t y cov er ed by TCT.The spouses have sev en chi l dre n, namel y:Oscar , Ar acel i , Her mi ni a, Aur or a, Emmanuel , Cesar and Rodr i go, al l sur namedReyes .
No, I t must be not ed t hat f or marr i ages gover ned by t he rul es of conj ugal part ner shi p of gai ns, an obl i gat i on ente r ed i nt o by t he husbandandwi f ei schargeabl eagai nstt hei rconj ugalpart nershi pand i ti st hepart ners hi pwhi chi spri mari l yboundf ori t srepayment .Thus, when t he spouses ar e sued f or t he enf or ceme nt ofan obl i gat i on ent er ed i nt o by t hem,t heyar e bei ng i mpl eaded i nt hei rcapaci t y as r epres entat i vesoft he conj ugalpart ner shi p and notas i ndependent debt orssuch t hattheconceptofj oi ntorsol i daryl i abi l i t y,asbet ween t hem,doesnotappl y.Buteve n assumi ngt hecont r aryt obet rue,t he natureoft heobl i gat i on i nvol vedi nthi scase,i snotsol i darybutrather merel yj oi nt ,maki ngi mperi alsti l li nappl i cabl etot hi scase.
On Apri l18,1973,I smaelReyes di ed i nt est at e.Pri ort o hi s death, I smaelReye swasnot i fied bytheBur eau ofI nt er nalReve nue( BI R)of hi si ncomet ax defici encywhi ch aroseoutofhi ssal eofaparcell and l ocated i n TandangSora, Quezon Ci t y.For f ai l ur et o set t l e hi st ax l i abi l i t y,t he amounti ncr eased t o aboutP172, 724. 40 and si nceno paymentwasmadebyt hehei r sofdeceasedI smaelReyes ,t hepropert y cover edbyTCTNo.4983wasl evi edsol dandeventual l yf orf ei t edbyt he Bur eau ofI nt ernalRevenuei nf avoroft hegover nment .
I ti scl earthatpri vat erespondentcannotmai nt ai nt hepres entsui t agai nstpet i t i oner . Rather ,hi s re medy i st o fil e a cl ai m agai nstt he Al i pi osi nt hepr oceedi ngf ort heset t l eme ntoft heest at eofpe t i t i oner ’ s husbandor ,i fnonehasbeen commenced,hecan fil eapet i t i on ei t her f or t he i ssuance ofl et t ersofadmi ni st rat i on or f or t he al l owance of wi l l ,dependi ng on whet her pet i t i oner ’ s husband di ed i nt est at e or
Somet i mei n 1976,pet i t i oners ’predecessorOscarReyesavai l edoft he BI R’ st axamnes t yandhewasabl et oredee mt heproper t ycove r edby TCTNo.4983uponpayme ntoft her educedt axl i abi l i t yi nt heamount ofaboutP18, 000. 18
On May10,1989,pri vat ere spondentCesarRey es,brot herofOscar Reyes,fil edapet i t i on f ori ssuanceofl et t ersofadmi ni st rati on wi ththe Regi onalTri alCourtofQuezon Ci t ypr ayi ng f orhi sappoi nt mentas admi ni st rat oroft heest at eoft hedeceased I smaelReyeswhi ch est at e i ncl uded 50% oft heAr ayatproper t i escov er edbyTCT Nos.4983 and 3598.Oscar Reyes fil ed hi s condi t i onal opposi t i on t her et o on t he groundt hatt heArayatpropert i esdonotf orm partoft heest at eoft he deceasedashe( Oscar )hadacqui r edthepr opert i esbyredempt i on and orpur chase.
deceasedI smaelReyeswi t houtpr ej udi cet otheout comeofanyact i on t obebr oughtt here af t eri nt hepr opercourton t hei ssueofownershi p consi deri ngthatt hesubj ectpropert i esarest i l lt i t l edundert hetorr ens syst em i nt henamesofspousesI smaelandFel i saRevi t aReyeswhi ch undert hel aw i sendowed wi t hi ncont est abi l i t yunt i laf t eri thasbeen setasi de i nt he manneri ndi cat ed i nt hel aw.The decl arat i on oft he provi si onalcharact eroft hei ncl usi on oft hesubj ectpropert i esi nt he i nvent ory as st re ssed i nt he order i s wi t hi nt he j uri sdi ct i on oft he ProbateCourt .
The pr obat e cour tsubsequent l yi ssued l et t er s ofadmi ni st r at i on i n f avorofCesarReyeswher et hel att erwasorderedt osubmi tat rueand compl et ei nvent ory of pr oper t i es pert ai ni ng t ot he est at e of t he decease d and t he speci alpower s ofat t or neyexecut ed by t he ot her hei r s who r es i de i n t he USA and t hat of Aur or a Rey es Day ot conf ormi ngtohi sappoi nt mentasadmi ni st r at or .CesarReye sfil ed an i nvent ory of r eal and per sonal pr opert i es of t he deceas ed whi ch i ncl udedt heArayatpropert i eswi t hatot alareaof1, 009sq.met ers.
#15
–
HI LARI A
Pe t i t i one r , BAGAYAS,
vs. ROGELI O BAGAYAS,FELI CI DAD BAGAYAS,ROSALI NA BAGAYAS, MI CHAEL BAGAYAS,and MARI EL BAGAYAS, Res pondent s.
Facts:
Issue:
Pet i t i onerfil ed acompl ai ntf orannul mentofsal eand part i t i on bef ore t he RTC,cl ai mi ng t hat Rogel i o,Fel i ci dad, Rosal i na,Mi chael ,and Mari el ,al lsurnamed Bagayas( r espondent s)i nt ended t o excl ude her f r om i nher i t i ng f r om t he est at e of her l egal l y adopt i ve par ent s, Maxi mi noBagayas( Maxi mi no)andEl i gi aCl ement e( El i gi a) ,byf al si f yi ng adeedofabsol ut esal e( deedofabsol ut esal e)purport edl yexecut edby t hedeceasedspouses( Maxi mi noandEl i gi a)t ransf err i ngt woparcel sof l and ( subj ect l ands) regi st ere di nt hei r names t ot hei r bi ol ogi cal chi l dren, r espondent Rogel i o and Or l ando Bagayas( Or l ando) .Sai d deed,whi ch wassupposedl yexec ut ed on Oct ober7,1974,boret he si gnat ur eofEl i gi awhocoul dnothaveaffixedhersi gnat ur et her eonas shehadl ongbeen.
Cant heprobat ecourtdet er mi neowner shi povert hepr opert y? Hel d:
No,t hequest i on ofowner shi pi sasarul e,an ext raneousmatt erwhi ch t heProbateCourtcannotre sol vewi t hfinal i t y.Thus,f ort hepurposeof det er mi ni ng whet her a ce r t ai n pr oper t y shoul d or shoul d not be i ncl uded i nt hei nvent oryofest at epr oceedi ng,t heprobatecourtmay passupon t het i t l etheret o,butsuch det ermi nati on i sprovi si onal ,not concl usi ve,andi ssubj ectt othefinaldeci si on i n aseparateacti on t o r e sol v et i t l e .
Respondent sl i kewi set est i fied i nt hei rdef ensedenyi nganyknowl edge oft he al l eged adopt i on ofpet i t i onerby Maxi mi no and El i gi a,and poi nt i ng out t hat pet i t i oner had not ev en l i ve d wi t h t he
We find t hat t he r espondent Cour t di d not er ri n affir mi ng t he provi si onali ncl usi on oft he subj ectpr opert i es t ot he est at e oft he 19
f ami l y.Furt hermore,Rogel i ocl ai medthataf t ert hei rparentshad di ed, heandOr l andoexe cut eda documentdenomi nat edasDee dofExt r a j udi ci alSuccessi on( deedofext r aj udi ci alsuccessi on)overt hesubj ect l andstoeffectt hetr ansf eroft i t l esthereoft ot hei rnames.Bef orethe deed ofextr aj udi ci alsuccessi on coul d beregi st ered,however ,adeed ofabsol ut esal etr ansf err i ngt hesubj ectl andst ot hem wasdi scover ed f r om t he ol d fil es of Maxi mi no, whi ch t hey used by “ r eason of conveni ence”t oacqui ret i t l et othesai dl ands.
adopt i on,aswel last hef orgeryofEl i gi a’ ssi gnatureon t hequest i oned deed,nopart i t i on wasdecr eed,asthe acti on was,i nf act ,di smi ssed. Consequent l y,t he decl arati on t hatpet i t i oneri st he l egal l y adopt ed chi l d ofMaxi mi no and El i gi a di d not amount t o a decl ar at i on of hei r shi p and coowner shi p upon whi ch pet i t i oner may i nst i t ut e an act i on f or t he amendment of t he cer t i ficate s of t i t l e cover i ng t he subj ectl and.Morei mport ant l y,t heCourthasconsi st ent l yrul ed t hat t hetr i alcourtcannotmakea decl arat i on ofhei rshi pi n an ordi nary ci vi lact i on,f ormatt ersrel ati ngt ot heri ght soffil i ati on and hei rshi p mustbevent i l atedi n aspeci alproceedi ngi nst i t ut ed preci sel yf orthe purpose of det er mi ni ng such ri ght s.Ther ef ore ,t he remedy t hen of pet i t i oneri stoi nst i t ut ei nt estateproceedi ngsf ortheset t l ementofthe est at eoft hedeceasedspouseMaxi mi noandEl i gi a.
I n di smi ssi ngCi vi lCase No.0442,t heRTC decl ared t hatpet i t i oner coul dnotask f ort hepart i t i on oft hesubj ectl ands,event hough shei s an adopt ed chi l d, because “ she was not abl et o prov e any oft he i nst ancesthatwoul di nval i dat et hedeed ofabsol ut esal e”purport edl y exe cut ed by Maxi mi no and El i gi a.Thi sconcl usi on cameaboutasa conse quence of t he RTC’ s findi ng t hat , si nce t he subj ec tl ands bel onged excl usi vel yt o Maxi mi no,t her e was no need t o secur et he consentofhi swi f ewhowasl ongdead bef oret hesal et ook pl ace.For t hi sr eason,t he f orger y ofEl i gi a’ ssi gnatureon t he quest i oned deed washel dt obei nconsequent i al .However ,on r econsi der at i on,t heRTC decl are dt hati tc ommi t t ed a mi st ake i n hol di ngthe subj ectl ands as exc l usi ve proper t i es of Maxi mi no “ si nce t here was al r eady an admi ssi on by t hedef endant sduri ngthe pret ri alconf ere ncet hatt he subj ect pr opert i es ar e t he conj ugal pr opert i es of the spouses Maxi mi noBaga yas and El i gi a Cl ement e. ”Nonet hel es s, t he RTC sust ai ned i t sdi smi ssalofCi vi lCaseNo.0442 on t heground t hati t const i t ut edacol l ater alatt ackupont heti t l eofRogel i oandOrl ando.
Case Di ges tbyDREW #16 -URI ARTE V.CFI
al l eged naturalchi l doft hedeceasedfil edpet i t i on f or Shor tsummar y: set t l ementofI NTESTATE est at eofDon Juan Uri art eyGoi t ei n Negr os Occi dent alCourt .PNB was eve n appoi nt ed as speci aladmi ni st r at or , butPNB f ai l edt oqual i fied.MTD fil edbynephew ofDonJuan,al l egi ng t hat whi l e he was i n Spai n, t he dec ease d made a wi l lAND t hat pet i t i onerhad doubt f uli nt erest( proceedi ng f orhi srecogni t i on as a nat uralchi l d notyetdone) .Pendi ng t hi s,t henephewsi nst i t ut ed a peti t i on f orpr obat eoft hewi l lofDon Juan i n Mani l a.Al l egednatural son opposed,cont endi ng t hatNegr os court s al r eady had exc l usi ve j ur i sdi ct i on of t he case. But Negr os cour t di smi ssed t he speci al proc eedi ng, and t he Mani l a court proc eeded t o probat et he wi l l . Pet i t i onercont est edi t .Courthel dt hatsi ncethedecedentwasanonr esi dent ,bothMani l aandNegr oscourt smaybeproperve nuesf ort he proc eedi ngs. But si nce probat e proc eedi ngs enj oy pri ori t y ove r i nt est ateproceedi ngs,acti on byMani l acourtproper .Eveni ft hevenue was i mpr oper , pet i t i oner consi der ed t o have wai ved t he def ect by l aches.Last l y,t he courthel dt hati fev errecogni zed as t he natural
Issue:
I st heordi narycourtvest ed wi t h powert odet ermi ned hei rshi p ofan adoptedchi l d? Hel d:
No.Whi l etheRTC mayhavemade a defini t i verul i ng on pet i t i oner ’ s 20
chi l d of t he decedent , he coul d opt t oi nt er ve ne i nt he probat e proceedi ngs,ort ohavei topenedi fal readyfini shed.
I ssue: W/N NEGROS COURT ERRED I N DI SMI SSI NG THE
Facts:
Rul i ng:NO.
I NTESTATE PROCEEDI NGS BEFORE I T?
Don Juan Uri art eyGoi t edi ed i n Spai n,l ef tpropert i esbot hi n Mani l a and Neg r os Theal l eged nat ur alson ofDon Juan,VI CENTE URI ARTE,fil ed pet i t i on
Decedenti sani nhabi t antofaf orei gn count ry( Spai n)duri ngthet i me ofhi sdeath,sothecourt si nt hepr ovi nceswher ehel ef tpropert ymay t akecogni zanceofset t l ementofhi sestat e
•
•
•
• •
f ors et t l emento fI NTESTATE ESTATE ofDon Juan bef or et he Negr os Occi dent al court . Not et hat duri ng t hat t i me, t he procee di ngs f or compul sor yacknowl edgmentast henat ur alsonofDon Juan wasst i l l pendi ng PNB al sowasappoi nt edasspeci aladmi ni st rat oroft heest at e,butPNB f ai l e dt oqual i f y OPPOSI TI ON TO PETI TI ON byHI GI NI O URI ARTE ( nephew ofDonJuan) : Don Juan l ef tawi l l ,execut edi n Spai n,dul yaut hent i cat ed-submi t t ed
Here ,decedentl ef tpropert i esbot hi nMani l aandi nNegros Even i fNegroscourtfirstt ookcogni zanceoft hecase,st i l lhast ogi ve way t o Mani l a cour t speci al pr oceedi ng i nt ended t o effect t he di st ri but i on oft heest at eofadeceasedperson,whet heri n accordance wi t ht hel aw oni nt est at esuccessi onori naccor dancewi t hhi swi l l ,i sa " probat ematt er"oraproceedi ngf ortheset t l ementofhi sestat e.
bef or eNegr oscour t Vi CENTE' scapaci t yandi nt er estar equest i onabl e JUAN URI ARTE ZAMACONA ( di ko al am how r el at ed) commenced • •
•
SPECPRO f orPROBATE OFLASTWI LLOFDON JUAN bef or eMani l a court s+MTD i nNeg r osCourt s Si nce t her e' s a wi l l ,no need f or i nt est at e proceedi ngs bef ore Negros
BUT t est at e proceedi ngs,f or the set t l ement of the est at e of a deceased pers on t ake precedence overi nt est at e proceedi ngsf or t hesamepurpose.
Cour t s Vi cent ehadnol egalper sonal i t yt osue OPPOSED by VI CENTE: Negr os Court s fir stt ook co gni z ance, i t had •
So even pendi ng I nt est ateproceedi ngs,i fi ti sf ound i thatthe
•
acqui redexcl usi vej uri sdi ct i on overt hesame
decedenthad l ef ta l astwi l l ,proceedi ngsf orthe probate oft he l att er shoul dr epl ace the i nt est ate proceedi ngs even i f at that st age an admi ni st r at or had al r eady been appoi nt ed, t he l at t er bei ngr equi r ed t or enderfinalaccountandt ur n overt heest at ei n
NEGROSCOURT:DI SMI SS pr ocee di ngsbef or ei t VI CENTE fil edOMNI BUSMOTI ON i nMani l aCour tf orl eavet oi nt ervene •
hi sposses si on t otheexecut orsubsequent l yappoi nt ed.
•
•
+ di smi ssalof pet i t i on f or pr obat e + annul ment of procee di ngs – DENI ED Mani l acourtadmi t t edtoprobatet hel astwi l l
I fwi l lrej ectedordi sproved,proceedi ngsshal lcont i nueasi nt estacy VI CENTE al r eady wai ved pr ocedur aldef ectofVENUE I MPROPERLY LAID 21
Facts:
Heknew t hatt her ewasawi l lwhen aMTD wasfil edi n Negr osco ur t , soheshoul d havefil ed a MTD i n Mani l a courtear l i er :Mani l a court already
Pet i t i onerRebongappl i ed f orapet i t i on t ocancelt heannotat i on on t hecerti ficateoft i t l eofal andwhi chhei nheri t edf rom hi sparent s. •
Theannot at i on waspur suantt oSect i ons 1 and 4 ofRul e74 oft he
•
*appoi nt edanadmi ni st rat or
Rul esofCourt( on set t l ementofest ate)t otheeffectt hatt heproperty i sst i l lsubj ectt oanycl ai m bycredi t orsandotherhei rsofhi sdeceased parent swi t hi n2yearsf rom set t l ementofest ate.
*admi t t edthewi l lt opr obatemoret han 5mont hsearl i er Courtwoul dnotannulproceedi ngsre gul arl yhadi nal owercourteve n i fthel att erwasnott he heref or,i ft henetr esul twoul dbe pr opervenuet
Pet i t i onerbasedherpet i t i on f orcancel l ati on on sect i on 112ofActno.
•
496.
t ohavet hesamepr oceedi ngsrepeat edi n someot hercourtofsi mi l ar j ur i sdi ct i on
HOWEVER,Res pondentJudgedeni edherpet i t i on.Shenow cl ai ms
•
t hatJudgeactedwi t hgraveabuseofdi scret i on. Ast oi nt er estofVi cent ei nt hecase Twoal t er nat i vesf oran acknowl edgednat ur alchi l dt opr ovehi sst at us andi nt eresti nt heestat eoft hedeceasedparent :
I ssue/Hel d:
( 1)t oi nt ervenei ntheprobateproceedi ngi fi ti ssti l lopen;and
Whet hert hepet i t i on t ocancelannot at i onshoul dbeal l owed.
•
( 2)t oaskf ori t sreopeni ngi fi thasal readybeen cl osed.
NO Rat i o :
#17-Rebongvs.I banez
•
The annot at i on coul d NOT be cancel l ed because the r egi st er ed
i nt erest shavenotyett ermi natedandceased. Thet woyearperi odr equi r edbyRul e74 hasnotyetl apsedwhent he
•
Subj ect :
pet i t i on f orcancel l ati on wasfil ed.
Li abi l i t yofHei rsandDi str i but ees
•
Nei t hersect i on 4,Rul e74norAct496aut hori zest hesubsti t ut i on of
a bond f or a l i en or r egi st ere di nt er est ,whet hervest ed,expedi ent , i nchoateorc ont i ngent ,whi chhavenotyett ermi nat edorceased. 22
Rul e74 Sec.1provi desthatwhent her earenoout st andi ngdebt st he
#18-Her nandezv.Andal
t hough hei rsmaydi vi det heest at ebymeansofapubl i ci nst rumen A t .l
Facts:
i ti scontended thataverbalpart i ti on i senti rel y voi d and cannot be val i dat ed by any act s shor t of t he execut i on of a publ i c
Cr esenci a,Mari a and Aqui l i na Her nandez aresi st er swho i nher i t ed f rom t hei rf atheraparcelofl and.Theyparti t i onedt hel andverball y.
document ,t herear enoi ndi cati onsi nt hephr aseol ogy oft herul e t oj ust i f y an affi r mat i veanswer .Wherethel aw i nt endsa wr i t i ng orotherf ormal i tyto be the essenti alrequi si tetothe val i di tyof
Af t er war ds Mar i a and Aqui l i na sol dt hei r shar et o Zacar i as Andal . Cr esenci at ri edt orepur chaset hel andsol datP150butAndaldi dnot agree .I n hersuppl ementalcompl ai ntshe al l eged t hatshe offer ed t o r epur chasei tf orP860 butAndalasked f oran ext ensi on butl at eron sol dthel andbackt oMari aandAqui l i naf orP970.
t hetr ansact i on i tsa ysso i n cl earand unequi vocalt erms.Sec.1 Rul e 74 cont ai ns no such expres s or cl ear decl ar at i on t hat t he r equi r ed publ i ci nst rumenti sto be const i t ut i ve ofacont ractof pa r t i t i on.
Duri ngt ri al ,counself orpl ai nt i ff cont endedt hatt hebestevi dencewas t hedocumentofpart i t i on.Thet ri alcourtrul ed t hatunderRul es74 and123 oft heRul esofCourtandArt .1248 oft heCC,par olevi dence of part i t i on i s i nadmi ssi bl e hence t he r esal e of Andal t o t he Her nandezeswasnul landvoi d.Hencethi sappeal .
Li kewi se,t heRul esofCourtpromul gat ed by t heJudi ci aldepart ment deal swi t h matt ersofprocedureexcl usi vel y.Fort heCourtt oprescri be whati st obeabi ndi ngagr eeme ntbet ween cohei r si nt heset t l eme nt r d oft hei rpri vat eaffai rswhi ch i n nowayaffectt heri ght sof3 par t i e s woul dbet ot r anscendi t sr ul emaki ngpower .
I ssue: W/N acont r actofpar t i t i oncanbepr ovedbypar olevi dence
CaseDi ges tbyROVER
G. R.No.147468 Hel d:YES
Apri l9,2003
#19 - SPOUSES EDUARDO ARENAS DOMI NGO & JOSEFI NA CHAVEZ DOMI NGO,pet i t i oners,
Ther ear e2 confli ct i ngvi ewsast owhet heran agr eeme ntofpar t i t i on shoul dbei n wri t i ngundert hestat ut eoff rauds.Part i t i on i sexcl uded f rom t heoperat i on oft hestat ut eoff raudsf orthereason t hatpart i t i on i snota conveyancebuts i mpl ya separat i on and desi gnat i on oft hat partoft hel andswhi chbel ongst oeacht enanti ncommon.
Vs. LI LI A MONTI NOLA ROCES, CESAR ROBERTO M. ROCES,ANA 23
provi si onsofsect i on4,rul e74oft heRul esofCourt .
I NES MAGDALENA ROCES TOLENTI NO,LUI S MI GUEL M.ROCES, JOSE ANTONI O M. ROCES and MARI A VI DA PRESENTACI ON
When r espondent sl ear ned oft hesal eoft hepr oper t yt o pet i t i oner s, t hey fil ed a compl ai nt agai nst Mont i nol a and pet i t i oner s wi t ht he Regi onalTr i alCourtofPasi g. Theyar gued t hatt heaffidavi tofsel f adj udi cat i on wasf raudul entbecauseMont i nol awasnotan hei roft he Rocesspousesand i twasnott ruet hatLi l i aRoceswasdead.
ROCES,r espondents.
FACTS: ThespousesCesarandLi l i aRoceswer et heowner soft wocont i guous par cel sofl and,OnNovember1962,t heGSI Scausedt heannot at i onof an affidavi tofadver se cl ai m on t he t i t l es al l egi ng t hatt he spouses havemort gagedt hesamet oi t .
Pet i t i onersi nt hei ransweral l eged t hatt heyarebuyersi n good f ai t h and t hatt heact i onsoft heres pondent swasbarr ed by est oppeland l aches.
GSI S wr ot ea l et t ert o CesarRocesdemandi ng t hesur r enderoft he owner' sdupl i catesoft i t l es,SpousesRocesf ai l edt ocompl y,GSI S fil ed a peti t i on wi t ht het hen CourtofFi rs tI nst anceofRi zal , prayi ngt hat t heowner' sdupl i cat esi n Roces'possessi on be decl arednul land voi d and t hatt he Regi st erofDeeds ofPasi g be di r ect ed t oi ssue new owner' sdupl i catest oGSI S.CFIofRi zalgrant edt hepet i t i on.
Tr i alcour tr ender edj udgme nti nf avoroft her espondent .CA r ever sed t hedeci si on andorderedMont i nol atopaythePet i t i oners,t het i t l ewas r ei nst at edbackt other espondent sand t hatal lot hercl ai msmadeby t hePet i t i onersweredi smi ssed. Pet i t i oner sfil ed a Mot i on f orReconsi derat i on butwas deni ed hence t hi spe t i t i on.
Cesardi ed i nt es t at e on January1980,survi ve d by hi swi dow al ong wi t hal lt her espondent si nt hi scase. On Jul y1992,Monti nol aanephew ofLi l aRoces exe cut edan affidavi t ofsel f adj udi cati on overthesai d parcel sofl and.Thatthe propert i es wer eacqui r eddur i ngt heexi st enceoft hei rmar r i age;t hatt hespouses l ef tnohei rsexceptt hebrot herofLi l i aRoces,whowashi sf ather;t hat nei t heroft hespousesl ef tanywi l lnoranydebts;andt hathewasthe sol ehei roft heRocesspouses.
I SSUE: 1. Whet hert hePet i t i oner si nhol di ngtheannot at i on i nt heti t l eregar di ng SEC.4,RULE 74 i san encumbr ancewhi ch di sq ual i fiest hem f r om bei ngi nnocentpur chaser sf orval ue 2. Whet hert heRes pondent swasbar r edbyEst oppelandLaches
Mont i nol afil edapeti t i on agai nstGSI Swi t ht heRegi onalTri alCourtof Pasi g, Dur i ng t he t r i al , GSI S f ai l ed t o pr oduce any document evi denci ngtheal l eged realest atemort gagebyRocesoft heproperti es. Hence,t het ri alcourtr ender ed j udgmenti nf avorofMont i nol a.GSI S di dnotappealt hej udgmentt husbecamefinalandexecut ory .
HELD: 1. The f ore goi ng rul e cl ear l y cover st r ansf er s ofr ealpropert yt o any person,as l ongasthe depri ved hei rorcredi t orvi ndi cateshi sri ght s wi t hi nt wo year sf r om t he dat eoft heset t l eme ntand di st r i but i on of estat e.Cont raryt opet i t i oners'cont ent i on,theeffectsoft hi sprovi si on are notl i mi t ed t ot he hei rs or ori gi naldi st ri but ees ofthe est at e
Mont i nol asol dtheparcel sofl andtoSpousesDomi ngo,subj ectt ot he 24
propert i es,butshal laffectanytr ansf ereeoft heproperti es. Hence, pet i t i oner s cannot be consi dered buyer si n good f ai t h and cannotnow avoi dt heconsequencesbr oughtaboutbytheappl i cat i on ofRul e74,Sect i on4oft heRul esofCourt . 2. Hence,pet i t i oners cannot be consi der ed buyer si n good f ai t h and cannotnow avoi dt heconsequencesbr oughtaboutbytheappl i cat i on ofRul e74,Sect i on4oft heRul esofCourt . Del ayi san i ndi spensabl erequi si t ef orafindi ngofest oppelbyl aches, butt obebar r edf r om br i ngi ngsui tongr oundsofest oppelandl aches, t hedel aymustbe l engt hy and unreas onabl e. No unreas onabl edel ay can beatt ri but edt orespondent si nt hi scase.
I n 1952,Fel i ci dad Marquez di ed i nt est at e.Thi rt y years l at erori n 1982, Raf ael Mar quez , Sr . ex ecut ed an " Affidavi t of Adj udi cat i on" vest i ng unt o hi ms el fsol e owner shi pt ot he pr oper t y .Ther eaf t er on December1983Raf aelMarquez,Sr .execut eda" DeedofDonat i onI nt er Vi vos cover i ng t he house and l otaboveme nt i oned t ot hr ee oft hi s chi l dren,namel y:( 1)pet i t i onerRaf ael ,Jr . ;( 2)Al f redo;and ( 3)Bel en, bot hpr i vat er espondent sher ei n,t ot heexcl usi onofhi sot herchi l dr en, pet i t i onersher ei n. TCT No.33350 wascancel l ed and TCT No.47572 wasi ssuedi npr i vat er espondent s'name . Fr om 1983 t o1991,pri vat ere spondent swer ei n act ualposses si on of t hel and.However ,whenpeti t i onersl earnedaboutt heexi st enceofTCT No. 47572, t hey i mmedi at el y demanded t hat si nce t hey ar e al so chi l dren ofRaf aelMarquez,Sr. ,t hey are ent i t l ed t ot hei rrespect i ve share s ove rt he l and i n ques t i on. Pri vat e r espondent s i gnore d pet i t i oner’ sdemands.
DECI SI ON:WHEREFORE,i nvi ew oft hef or egoi ng,t hei nst antpet i t i on f orre vi ew i s DENI ED.The deci si on and r esol ut i on oft he Cour tof Appeal si nCAG. R.No.CV No.62473ar eAFFI RMED i nt ot o.
Pet i t i onersj oi nedbyRaf aelMarquezJr .fil edacompl ai nton May1991 f or " Reconve yance and Part i t i on wi t h Damages " bef or et he t r i al court al l egi ng t hatboth t he " Affidavi tofAdj udi cat i on"and " Deed of Donati on I nt erVi vos"wer ef raudul entsi ncethe pri vat erespondent s t ook advant age oft he advanced age oft hei rf at her i n maki ng hi m exec ut et hesai ddocuments .
G. R.No.125715 December29,1998 #20 -RICARDO F.MARQUEZ,AUREA M.CABEZAS,EXEQUI EL F. MARQUEZ,SALVADOR F.MARQUEZ,ANTONI O F.MARQUEZ,and RAFAELF.MARQUEZ,JR. ,pet i t i oner s, Vs.
Pri vater espondent sarguedt hatpet i t i oner’ sacti on wasal readybarred byt hest at ut eofl i mi t at i onst hatt hesameshoul d’ vebeen fil edwi t hi n 4years.
COURT OF APPEALS, ALFREDO F. MARQUEZ and BELEN F. MARQUEZ,r es pondents.
Tr i alCour tr ender ed i t s deci si on i nf avoroft he Pet i t i oner s.St at i ng t hat : Pre scr i pt i on cannot set i n because an act i on t o set asi de a
FACTS:
documentwhi chi svoi dabi doesnotpresc ri be. Bot ht he" Affidavi t ni t i o ofAdj udi cat i on"and t he" Donat i on I nt erVi vos"di d notproduceany l egaleffectanddi dnotconf eranyri ghtwhatsoev er .
Duri ng t hei rl i f et i me,t he spouses Raf aelMarquez,Sr .and Fel i ci dad Mar quez bego tt wel ve chi l dr en, some t i me i n 1945, t he spouses acqui r ed a par celofl and,wher ei nt hey const ruct ed t hei rconj ugal home.
Pri vat ere spondent sappeal edt otheCA and deci si on oft heRTC was 25
rever sedst ati ngthat :I nl i newi t ht hedeci si on oft heSupremeCourti n Ger ona v .deGuz man,11 SCRA 143,157,t heact i on t her ef ormaybe fil ed wi t hi nf our ( 4) year sf r om t he di scove ry of t he f r aud. Such di scov eryi sdeemedt ohavet aken pl acei nt hecaseatbaronJune16, 1982,whent heaffidavi tofsel f adj udi cat i onwasfil edwi t ht heRegi st er ofDeedsand new cer t i ficateoft i t l ewasi ssued i nt henameofRaf ael Mar quez ,Sr . Consi deri ng t hatt he peri od f r om June 16,1982,when TCTNo.33350wasi ssuedi nt henameofRaf aelMar quezSr . ,t oMa y 31,1991,when appel l ees'compl ai ntwas fil ed i n court ,i s ei ght( 8) year s,el even ( 11)mont hsand fif t een ( 15)days,appel l ant s'act i on t o annult hedeedofsel f adj udi cati on i sdefini t el ybarredbyt hest atut eof l i mi t a t i o n.
t r ust under Ar t i cl e 1456 was es t abl i shed. Co ns t r uc t i v et r us t s ar e c r e at e di ne q ui t yi no r de rt op r e v e n tun j us te n r i c h me nt .T he ya r i s e cont r ary t oi nt ent i on agai nstone who,by f r aud,dur ess orabuse of c o nfide nc e ,o bt ai nso rh ol dst hel e g al ,r i g htt opr o pe r t ywhi c hheo ug ht no t ,i ne q ui t yandg o odc o ns c i e nc e ,t oho l d.
I nt hi sregard,i ti sset t l edt hatan acti on f orreconveyancebasedon an i mpl i edorconst ruct i vet rustprescri besi nt enyearsf rom t hei ssuance oft heTorr ensti t l eoverthepropert y. Fort hepurposeoft hi scase,t he presc ri pt i veperi odshal lst artt orunwhenTCTNo.33350wasi ssued, whi ch was on June 16,1982.Thus,consi der i ng t hatt he act i on f or r econve yancewasfil edon May31,1991,orappr oxi mat el yni neyear s l ater ,i ti sevi dentt hatprescri pti on had notyetbarredtheact i on.
Peti t i onersfil ed a mot i on ofr econsi derati on butproved unavai l i ng. Hencethi spet i t i on.
Cogni zantoft hef actt hatt hedi sput ed l and wasconj ugalpropert yof t hespousesRaf ael ,Sr .and Fel i ci dad,owner shi p oft hesamei st obe equal l ydi vi dedbet weenbot hoft hem.
I SSUE: Whet hert hei ract i onf orr econveyancehadpr escr i bed?
Presci ndi ngtheref rom,can Raf aelMarquezSr . ,astrusteeofhi swi f e' s share,val i dl y donat et hi s port i on t ot he r espondent s? Obvi ousl y,he cannot ,asexpressl yprovi dedi nArt .736oft heCi vi lCode.
HELD: I t mustbe not ed t hat Fel i ci dad Mar quez di ed i n 1952; t hus, successi on t oheres t at ei sgovernedby t hepre sentCi vi lCode.Under Ar t i cl e887 t her eof ,hercompul soryhei r sar eherl egi t i mat echi l dr en, pet i t i oner s and pri vat er espondentt her ei n,and herspouse,Raf ael Marquez,Sr .Now,i n 1982,Raf aelMarquez,Sr .deci dedtoadj udi cat e t heent i repropert ybyexecut i ngan " Affidavi tofAdj udi cati on"cl ai mi ng t hathe i st he sol e survi vi ng hei rofhi s deceased wi f e Fel i ci dad F. Mar quez .
More over ,nobodycandi sposeoft hatwhi chdoesnotbel ongt ohi m. DECI SI ON:WHEREFORE,i n vi ew oft hef or egoi ng,t hedeci si on oft he Cour tofAppeal si n CAG. R.CV No.41214 i s REVERSED and SET ASI DE.Exceptas t ot he awar d ofat t or ney' sf ees whi ch i s her eby DELETED,t hej udgmentoft het ri alcourti n Ci vi lCaseNo.60887 i s REI NSTATED.Nocost s. G. R.No.L23638
As such,when Raf aelMar quez Sr . ,f orone r eason oranot her , mi sr epr esent ed i n hi suni l at eralaffidavi tt hathewasthe onl yhei rof hi s wi f ewhen i nf actt hei rchi l dre n wer e st i l lal i ve,and managed t o secureat ransf erofcer t i ficateoft i t l eunderhi sname,aconst ruct i ve
Oct ober12,1967
#21 -DI ONI SI O FERNANDEZ,EUSEBIO REYES and LUI SA REYES, peti ti oners,
26
exec ut ed;butdef er r ed r esol ut i on on t he quest i ons ofest oppeland r evocat i on " unt i lsuc ht i me when we shal lpass upon t he i nt r i nsi c
Vs.
v al i di t yo ft hepr o v i s i o nsoft hewi l lo rwhe nt heque s t i o no fa dj udi c at i o n
I SMAELADI MAGI BA,r es pondent.
" o ft hepr o pe r t i e si so ppo r t une l ypr e se nt e d. G. R.No.L23662
Opposi t orsFernandezandReyespet i t i onedf orr econsi derat i on,and/or new t ri al ,i nsi st i ng t hat the i ssues of est oppel and re vocati on be consi deredandr esol ved;on Jul y1959,t heCourtoverr ul edt hecl ai m t hatproponentwasi n est oppelt oask f ort heprobateoft hewi l l ,but " r eservi ng unt ot he part i es t he ri ghtt o rai se t he i ssue ofi mpl i ed r evocat i onatt heopport uneti me. "
Oct ober12,1967
MARI ANO REYES,CESAR REYES,LEONOR REYES andPACI ENCI A REYES,peti t i oners , Vs.
On January1960,t heCourtofFi r stI nst anceappoi nt edRi car doCruz asadmi ni st rat orf ort hesol epurposeofsubmi t t i ngani nventoryoft he est at e,andthi swasdoneonFebruary9,1960.
I SMAELADI MAGI BA,r es pondent.
FACTS: On February 1962, af t er re cei vi ng f ur t her evi dence on t he i ssue whet hert heexecut i on byt het est at r i xofdeedsofsal ei nf avoroft he t es t ament ar y hei r , made i n 1943 and 1944, subsequent t ot he execut i on ofher1930 t est ament ,had re voked t hel att erunderArt i cl e 957( 2)oft he1950Ci vi lCode( Art .869oft heCi vi lCodeof1889) ,t he t ri alCourtresol vedagai nstt heopposi t orsandhel dt hewi l loft hel ate Benedi ct a de l osRey es" unaffec t ed and unre vo ked by t he deedsof sal e. "Wher eupon,t heopposi t orsel evat ed t he casetot he Courtof Appeal s.
OnJanuary1955,I smael aDi magi ba,now r espondent ,submi t t ed t ot he Court of Fi r st I nst ance a pet i t i on f or t he probate of t he purport edwi l loft hel at eBenedi ct adel osReyes,execut edon Oct ober 22,1930,andannexedt othepet i t i on.Thewi l li nst i t ut edt hepet i t i oner ast hesol ehei roft heestat eoft hedeceased.Thepet i t i on wassetf or hear i ng,and i n due ti me,Di oni si o Fernandez,Eusebi o Rey es and Lui sa Rey es and one mont h l at er , Mar i ano, Ces ar , Leonor and Paci enci a,al lsurnamedReyes,al lcl ai mi ngtobehei rsi nt est ateoft he decedent ,fil edopposi t i onst ot heprobat easked.Groundsadvancedf or t heopposi t i on weref orgery,vi cesofconsentoft het est atr i x,est oppel byl achesoft hepr oponentand r evocat i on oft hewi l lbyt wodeedsof conveyanceoft hemaj orport i on oft heest at emadebythet est atr i xi n f avoroft heproponenti n 1943 and1944,butwhi chconvey anceswer e final l ysetasi deby t hi sSupremeCourti n adeci si on promul gat ed on August3,1954.
Theappel l at eCour thel dt hatt hedecr eeofJune20,1958,admi t t i ng t hewi l lt oprobate,hadbecomefinalf orl ackofopport uneappeal ;t hat t he same was appeal abl ei ndependent l y of t he i ss ue of i mpl i ed revocati on;t hatcont rarytothecl ai m ofopposi t orsappel l ant s,t here had been no l egalr ev ocat i on by t heexec ut i on oft he1943 and 1944 deedsofsal e,becausethel att erhad beenmadei nf avoroft hel egat ee her sel f ,andaffirmedt hedeci si onoft heCourtofFi rs tI nst ance.
Af t ert r i alon t hef or mul at ed i ssues,t heCour tofFi r stI nst ance, bydeci si onofJune1958,f oundt hatt hewi l lwasgenui neandpr oper l y
I SSUE: 27
1. Whet hert hedecr eeoft heCourtofFi rs tI nst anceal l owi ngthewi l lt o probatehad becomefinalf orl ackofappeal ; 2. Whet her t he or der of t he Court of or i gi n dat ed Jul y 27, 1959, overr ul i ngt heest oppeli nvoked by opposi t orsappel l ant shad l i kewi se becomefinal ; 3. Whet hert he1930 wi l lofBenedi ct a de l osRey eshad been i mpl i edl y r ev oked by her exe cut i on of deeds of conve yance i nf avor of t he pr oponenton1943and1944.
sequi t urt oal l ow publ i cpol i cytobeevadedon t hepre t extofest oppel . Whet herornott heor derover r ul i ngt heal l egat i on ofest oppeli sst i l l appeal abl eornot,t hedef ensei spat ent l yunmeri t ori ousandtheCourt ofAppeal scorr ect l ysorul ed. 3. Asobserv edbyt heCour tofAppeal s,t heexi st enceofanysuchchange ordepart uref rom t heori gi nali nt entoft hetest atr i x,expressed i n her 1930 t est ament,i srender ed doubtf ulby t heci r cumst ancet hatt he subsequental i enat i onsi n1943 and1944 wer eexecute di nf avoroft he l egat eeherse l f ,appel l eeDi magi ba.I nf act ,as f ound by t heCourtof Appeal si ni t sdeci si on annul l i ng t heseconveyances" noc o ns i de r at i o n
HELD: 1. We agr ee wi t ht he Cour t ofAppeal s that t he appel l ant ' s st and i s unt enabl e. I ti s el ement ary t hat a pr obat e decr ee final l y and defini t i vel ysett l esal lquesti onsconcerni ngcapaci t yoft hetest atorand t he properexecut i on and wi t nessi ng ofhi sl astwi l land t est ament , i rr especti ve ofwhet heri t s provi si ons are val i d and enf orceabl e or ot herwi se.
what ev er was pai d by r es pondent Di magi ba" on acc ount of t he t r ans f e r s ,t he r e byr e nde r i ngi te v e n mo r edo ubt f ulwhe t he ri nc o nv e yi ng t hepr o pe r t yt ohe rl e g at e e ,t het e s t at r i xme r e l yi nt e nde dt oc o mp l yi n advancewi t hwhatshehad or dai ned i nhert est ament ,r at hert hanan
. al t e r at i o no rde par t ur et h er e f r o m” Revocat i on bei ngan excepti on,webel i eve,wi t ht heCourt sbel ow,t hat i nt he ci r cumst ances oft he part i cul arcase,Art i cl e 957 oft he Ci vi l Codeoft hePhi l i ppi nes,doesnotappl yt othecaseatbar .
As such,t he pr obat e or der i s finaland appeal abl e;and i ti s so r ecogni zed by expres s provi si ons ofSect i on 1 ofRul e 109.The rul e expr es sl y enumer at es si x di ffer enti nst ances when appealmay be t akeni nspeci alproceedi ngs.
Notonl yt hat ,buteve ni fi twer e appl i cabl e,t he annul mentoft he conveyances woul d notneces sari l yr esul ti nt he r evocat i on oft he l egaci es,i fwebeari n mi nd t hatt hefindi ngsmadei nt hedeci si on decr ee i ng t he annul mento ft he subsequent1943 and 1944 deedsof sal ewereal so t hati twas t hemorali nfluence,ori gi nati ng f rom t hei r confident i alre l at i onshi p,whi chwastheonl ycausef ort heexecut i on of t he1943and1944conv ey ances.
Ther ebei ngnocont r over syt hatt hepr obat edecr eeoft heCour tbel ow wasnotappeal edon t i me ,t hesamehadbecomefinalandconcl usi ve. Hence,t he appel l at e court s may no l ongerr ev oke sai d decr eenor re vi ew t heevi denceupon whi ch i ti smadet ores t .Thus,t heappeal bel at edl yl odgedagai nstt hedecr eewascor r ect l ydi smi ssed. 2. As t ot he i ssue ofes t oppel ,we have al r eady rul ed i n Guev ar a vs. Guevara,98Phi l .249,t hatt hepr esent ati on andprobat eofawi l lare requi rement sofpubl i cpol i cy,bei ngpri mari l ydesi gned t oprot ectt he t est at or' s, expr esse d wi shes, whi ch are enti t l ed t or espect as a consequence of t he decedent ' s owner shi p and ri ght of di sposi t i on wi t hi nl egall i mi t s.Evi denceofi ti st hedut yi mposedonacust odi anof awi l lt odel i vert hesamet ot heCourt ,andt hefineandi mpri sonment prescr i bed f or i t s vi ol at i on ( Revi sed Rul e 75) .I twoul d be a non
DECI SI ON: I n vi ew of t he f or egoi ng consi der at i ons, the appeal ed deci si on oft he Cour tofAppeal si s here by affirmed.Cost s agai nst appel l ant sReyesandFernandez.Soorder ed.
CaseDi ges tbySALLY 28
#22-Rodel asvs.Ar anza
HELD: No.L58509.Dec ember7,1982. *
Yes,pur suantt oAr t i cl e811 oft heCi vi lCode,pr obat eofhol ogr aphi c wi l l si st heal l owanceoft hewi l lbyt hecour taf t eri t sdueexecut i on has bee n pr ov ed. The pr obat e may be unco nt es t ed or not .I f uncont est ed,at l eastone i dent i f yi ng wi t ness i s requi r ed and,i fno wi t nessi savai l abl e,exper t sma yber esor t ed t o.I fcont est ed,atl east t hreei dent i f yi ng wi t nesses arerequi red.However ,i ft hehol ographi c wi l lhasbeen l ostordest r oyedandnoot hercopyi savai l abl e,t hewi l l cannot be pr obat ed because t he bes t and onl y ev i dence i st he handwri t i ngoft het est at o ri ns ai dwi l l .I ti sne c e ss ar yt hatt he r ebea
# 22 -I N THE MATTER OF THE PETI TI ON TO APPROVE THE WI LL OF RI CARDO B. BONI LLA, deceas ed, MARCELA RODELAS, pet i t i oner appel l ant ,vs.AMPARO ARANZA,ET.AL. ,opposi t or sappel l ee s,ATTY.LORENZO SUMULONG,i nt er ve nor .
FACTS:
c o mp ar i s o nbe t we e nsa mp l eh an dwr i t t e ns t a t e me nt so ft h et e s t a t o ra nd t h eh andwr i t t e n wi l l .Bu t ,a p ho t o s t at i cc o p yo rx e r o xc o p yo ft h e
Appel l ant Mar cel a Rodel as fil ed a pet i t i on wi t ht he Cour t ofFi r st I nst anceofRi zalf orthe probat eoft hehol ographi cwi l lofRi cardo B. Boni l l a and t he i ssuance ofl et t er st est amentary i n herf avor .The pet i t i on was opposed by t he appel l ee s Ampar o Ar anza Boni l l a, Wi l f er i neBoni l l a Tr eyes,Expedi t a Boni l l a Fr i asand Ephr ai m Boni l l a on t he gr ound t hat l ost or dest r oyed hol ogr aphi c wi l l s cannot be proved by secondary evi denceunl i ke or di nary wi l l s.Thel owercourt rendered a deci si on i nf avoroft he opposi t orsappel l ees.Hence,t hi s appeal .
hol ogr aphi cwi l lmaybeal l owedbecausecompar i soncan bemadewi t h t h es t a nda r d wr i t i ng so ft het e s t at o r .I nt hec a s eo fGa nv s .Y ap ,1 04 P hi l .509,t heCo ur tr ul e dt hat“ t heex e c ut i o nandt hec o nt e nt so fal o s t o rd e s t r o y e dh ol o g r a ph i cwi l lma yn o tb epr o v e db yt heba r et e s t i mo n yo f wi t nesseswhohaveseenand/orr ead suchwi l lThewi l li t sel fmustbe pr e sent ed;o t her wi s e,i tshal lpr o duc e no effec t .The l aw r egar ds t he do c ume nti t s el fasmat e r i alpr o o fo fa ut he nt i c i t y . ”But ,i nF oo t no t e8 o f s ai dde c i s i o n,i ts a yst h at“ P e r ha psi tma yb ep r o v e db yap ho t o g r a phi c orphot ost at i ccopy.Even a mi meogr aphed orc arbon copy;orby ot her s i mi l arme ans ,i fany ,whe r e byt heaut he nt i c i t yo ft hehandwr i t i ngoft he
I SSUE:
deceased may be exhi bi t ed and t est ed bef or et he pr obat e co urt . ” Ev i de nt l y ,t he phot ost at i c or xer ox copy of t he l ostor dest r oyed
Whet herahol ogr aphi cwi l lwhi ch wasl ostorcannotbef ound wi l lbe pr obate dbymeansofaphot ost ati ccopy.
h ol o g r ap hi cwi l lma yb ea dmi t t e db e c au set h en t h ea ut h ent i c i t yo ft h e h an dwr i t i n go ft h ede c e a s e dc a nb ede t e r mi n edbyt h epr o b at ec o u r t .
WHEREFORE,t he or der oft he l ower c our t dat ed Oct ober 3,1979, de ny i ngap pe l l ant ’ smo t i o nf o rr e c o ns i de r at i o ndat e dAug us t9,1979,o f t h e Or de rd at e dJ ul y2 3,1 97 9,di s mi s s i n gh erp e t i t i o nt oa pp r o v et h e 29
and hospi t al i z at i on. Rodol f o submi t t ed document ary ev i dence pre vi ousl y exe cut ed by t he decedent s, consi st i ng of i ncome t ax re t urns,vot er’ s affidavi t s,st atement s ofasset s and l i abi l i t i es,real est at et ax payment s, mot or vehi cl er egi st rat i on and passport s, al l i ndi cat i ng t hat t hei r permanent r esi dence was i n Angel es Ci t y , Pampanga.
wi l lo ft hel at eRi c a r d oB.Bo ni l l a,i she r e bySETASI DE.
#23-JAO vs.COURT OF APPEALS
G. R.No.128314.May29,2002 Pri vat e r espondent Peri co count er ed t hat t hei r deceas ed parent s act ual l yresi ded i n Rodol f o’ shousei n Quezon Ci t yatt heti meoft hei r deaths.Asamatt eroff act,i twasconcl usi vel ydecl aredi nt hei rdeath cert i ficat esthatt hei rl astr esi dencebef oret heydi ed wasat61 Scout Gandi a St r eet ,Quezon Ci t y.Rodol f o hi msel fe ven suppl i ed t heentr y appeari ngon t hedeat h cer t i ficateoft hei rmot her ,Andrea,andaffixed hi sownsi gnatur eont hesai ddocument .
#23 -RODOLFO V.JAO,pet i t i oner ,vs.COURT OF APPEALS and PERI CO V.JAO,r espondents . FACTS:
Peti t i oner( Rodol f oJao)and pri vat er espondent( Peri coJao)werethe onl ysonsoft hespousesI gnaci oJaoTayagandAndreaV.Jao,whodi ed i nt est atei n1988and1989,respecti vel y.Thedecedent sl ef tr ealest ate, cash,sharesofst ockandot herpersonalpropert i es.
TheTr i alCour tr ul ed i nf avorofPer i co.TheCA affir me di nt ot ot he t r i al ’ sc our tde c i s i o n.He nc e ,t hi spe t i t i o n. I SSUE:
Peri co i nst i t ut ed a pet i t i on f or i ssuance ofl et t ers ofadmi ni st rat i on bef or et heRTC ofQuezon Ci t y ,overt heest at eofhi spar ent s.Pendi ng t heappoi nt mentofaregul aradmi ni st r at or ,Peri comovedt hathe be appoi nt ed as speci al admi ni st r at or . He al l eged t hat hi s brot her , Rodol f o,was gr adual l y di ssi pat i ng t he asset s oft he est at e.More part i cul arl y,Rodol f owasrecei vi ngrental sf rom realpropert i eswi t hout r enderi ng any account i ng,and f or ci bl y openi ng vaul t s bel ongi ng t o t hei r dece ased pare nt s and di sposi ng of t he cash and val uabl es therei n.
Wher eshoul dt heset t l eme ntpr oceedi ngsbehad—i nPampanga,wher e t he decedent s had t hei r permanent r esi dence,or i n Quez on Ci t y , wher et heyact ual l yst ayedbef or et hei rdemi se? HELD:
Rul e73,Sect i on1oft heRul esofCourtst at es: —I ft he decedenti Wher e est at e ofdeceased per sons be set t l ed. s an
Rodol f o move df or t he di smi ssalof t he pet i t i on on t he gr ound of i mpropervenue. Heargued t hatt hedeceasedspousesdi dnotr esi dei n Quezon Ci t yei t herduri ngthei rl i f et i meoratt heti meoft hei rdeat hs. Thedecedent ’ sact ualr esi dencewasi n Angel esCi t y ,Pampanga,wher e hi sl at emot herusedt orun andoperat eabakery .Ast heheal t h ofhi s parent sdet eri oratedduetool dage,t heystayedi n Rodol f o’ sresi dence i n Quezon Ci t y,sol el yf ort hepurposeofobt ai ni ngmedi calt r eatment
theraci t i zen i nhabi t anto ft hePhi l i ppi ne satt het i meofhi sde at h,whe oranal i en,hi swi l lshal lbeproved,orl e t t e r so fadmi ni s t r at i o ng r ant e d, and hi se s t at es e t t l e d,i nt heCo ur to fF i r s tI ns t anc ei nt hepr o v i nc ei n
ndi fhei sani nhabi t antofa whi c hher e s i de satt het i meo fhi sde at h,a f orei gn count ry ,t heCourtofFi rstI nst anceofanyprovi ncei nwhi chhe had est at e.Thecourtfirs tt aki ngcogni zanceoft heset t l ementoft he 30
est ateofadecedentshal lexer ci sej uri sdi ct i on t ot heexcl usi on ofal l ot hercourt s.Thej uri sdi ct i on assumedbyacourt ,sof arasi tdepends on t he pl ace ofr esi dence oft he decedent ,oroft he l ocati on ofhi s est at e,shal lnotbe cont est ed i n a sui torpr oceedi ng,excepti n an appealf r om t hatcourt ,i nt he or i gi nalc ase,orwhen t he wantof j ur i sdi ct i onappear sont her ecor d.
domi ci l erequi resbodi l ypresencei nt hatpl aceandal soani nt ent i on t o make i tone’ s domi ci l e.No part i cul ar l engt h oft i me ofr esi dence i s r equi r edthough;howeve r ,t her esi dencemustbemoret hant emporary . The deat h cer t i ficat es t hus pr evai l ed as pr oof s of t he decedent s’ r esi dence at t er t he numer ous document ar y he t i me of deat h, ov evi dencepre sent edbypet i t i oner .Tobesure ,t hedocument spre sent ed bypet i t i onerper t ai nedno srequi red tt or e s i de nc eatt het i meo fd eat h,a
Cl e ar l y ,theestat eofan i nhabi t antofthePhi l i ppi nesshal lbesett l edor l et t ersofadmi ni st rat i on grant ed i nt he propercourtl ocated i nt he provi ncewher et hedecedentr e s i de satt het i meo fhi sde at h.
by t he Rul es ofCour t ,butt o n per manentr e si denc e ordomi c i l e.I , w e h e l d : Gar c i aFul ev .Co ur to fAp pe al s
The deat h cer t i ficat es t hus pr evai l ed as pr oof s of t he decedent s’ r esi dence at t er t he numer ous document ar y he t i me of deat h, ov evi dencepr esent edbypeti t i oner .Tobesure ,t hedocument spres ent ed bypet i t i onerper t ai nedno srequi red tt or e si de nc eatt het i meo fde at h,a by t he Rul es ofCour t ,butt o n per mane ntr e si de nc e ordomi c i l e.I
xxxxxxxxxt het er m“ r esi des”connot esexvit “act ualr esi dence” e r mi ni asdi st i ngui shedf rom “l egalresi denceordomi ci l e. ”Thi st erm “r esi des, ” l i ke t he t erms “ r esi di ng”and “ re si dence, ”i s el ast i c and shoul d be i nt erpret edi nt hel i ghtoft heobj ectorpurposeoft hestatut eo n rr ul ei whi ch i ti sempl oyed.I nt heappl i cat i on ofvenuest at ut esandr ul es— Sect i on 1,Rul e73 oft heRevi sed Rul esofCourti sofsuch nat ur e—
d:xxxxxxxxxt het erm “ res i des” Gar c i aFul ev .Co ur to fAp pe al s,wehel connotesexvit “act ualresi dence”asdi st i ngui shed f rom “ l egal e r mi ni resi dence ordomi ci l e. ”Thi st erm “ resi des, ”l i ke t he t erms “ resi di ng” and“ resi dence, ”i sel asti candshoul dbei nt erpret edi nt hel i ghtoft he obj ectorpurposeoft hestat ut eo i n whi chi ti sempl oyed.I nt he rr ul e appl i cat i on ofvenuest at ut esand rul es—Sect i on 1,Rul e73 oft he Rev i se d Rul es of Court i s of s uch nat ur e—r es i dence r at he rt han domi ci l ei sthesi gni ficantf act or .Evenwher ethest at ut eusestheword “ domi ci l e”st i l li ti sconst rued as meani ngresi denceand notdomi ci l e i nt he t ec hni calsense.Some case s make a di st i nct i on bet ween t he t er ms “ r esi dence”and “ domi ci l e”butas general l y used i n st at ut es fixi ng venue, t he t er ms ar e sy nonymous, and co nve yt he same meani ngast het erm “ i nhabi t ant . ”I n ot herwords,“ r esi des”shoul dbe vi ewed or under st ood i ni t s popul ar sense,me ani ng,t he per sonal , actualorphysi calhabi t ati on ofaperson,actualresi denceorpl aceof abode.I tsi gni fiesphysi calpresencei napl aceandactualst aythereat . I nt hi s popul ar sense,t he t er m means mer el yr esi dence,t hati s, per sonalr esi dence,notl egalr esi denceordomi ci l e.Resi dencesi mpl y r equi r es bodi l y prese nce as an i nhabi t ant i n a gi ven pl ace, whi l e
r esi dencer domi ci l ei st hesi gni ficantf actor .Even wheret he at he rt han st at ut e uses t he word “ domi ci l e”st i l li ti s const rued as meani ng r esi denceandnotdomi ci l ei nt het echni calsense.Somecasesmakea di st i nct i on bet ween t he t er ms “ r esi dence” and “ domi ci l e” but as gener al l y used i n st at ut esfixi ng ve nue,t he t er ms ar e synonymous, and conve yt he same meani ng as t he t er m “ i nhabi t ant . ”I n ot her wor ds,“ r esi des”shoul d bevi ewed orunder st ood i ni t spopul arsense, meani ng, t he personal , act ual or physi cal habi t at i on of a person, actualresi denceorpl ace ofabode.I tsi gni fiesphysi calpresencei na pl aceand act ualst ayt her eat .I nt hi spopul arsense,t het erm means merel y resi dence,t hati s,personalr esi dence,notl egalr esi dence or domi ci l e.Resi dencesi mpl yrequi r esbodi l ypre senceas an i nhabi t ant i n agi ven pl ace,whi l edomi ci l erequi resbodi l ypresencei nt hatpl ace andal soani nt ent i on t omakei tone’ sdomi ci l e.Nopart i cul arl engthof t i meofr esi dencei srequi redt hough;however ,t heresi dencemustbe mor et hant emporar y . V enuef o ro r di nar yc i v i lac t i o nsand t hatf o rs pe c i alp r o c e e di ng s hav e 31
her ei n, namel y , Manuel Cuenco, Lourde s Cuenco, Conce pci on CuencoManguer a, Carmen Cuenc o, Consue l o Cuenco Rey es and Ter esi t aCuencoGonzal es,al lofl egalageandr esi di ngi nCebu.
A at e,pet i t i oneri sobvi ousl yspl i t t i ng oneandt hesamemeani n g.tanyr st rawswhen hedi ffer ent i at esbet ween venuei n ordi naryci vi lact i ons andvenuei n speci alpr oceedi ngs.I nRaymondv.Cour tofAppeal sand ul edt hatvenuef orordi naryci vi lacti ons Be j e rv .Co ur to fAp pe al s,wer
Res pondent Lour des Cuenco fil ed a Pet i t i on f or Let t er s of Admi ni st r at i onwi t ht hecour toffir sti nst anceofCebu,al l egi ngamong otherthi ngs,t hatt hel atesenatordi edi i nMani l a;t hathewas nt e st at e are si dentofCebu att het i meofhi sdeath;and t hathel ef tr ealand per sonalproper t i esi n Cebu and Quez on Ci t y .On t he samedat e,t he Cebu courti ssuedan orderset t i ngthepet i t i on f orheari ngon 10 Apri l 1964,di rect i ngthatduenot i cebegi ven t oal lt hehei rsandi nt erest ed persons,andorderi ngt her equi si t epubl i cat i on t her eofatLA PRENSA, anewspaperofgeneralci rc ul ati oni nt heCi t yandProvi nceofCebu.
and t hatf orspec i alproc eedi ngshaveoneand t he samemeani ng.As t hus defined,“ r esi dence, ”i nt he cont extofv enueprovi si ons,means not hi ng mor et han a per son’ s act ual r esi dence or pl ace of abode, provi ded heresi destherei n wi t h cont i nui t yand consi st ency.Al lt ol d, t hel owercourtandt heCourtofAppeal scorr ect l yhel dt hatv enuef or t heset t l ementoft hedecedent s’i nt est ateestat ewas properl yl ai di n t heQuezonCi t ycourt . WHEREFORE,i n vi ew oft he f or egoi ng,t he pet i t i on i s DENI ED,and t he deci si on oft he CourtofAppeal si n CAG. R.SP No.35908 i s AFFI RMED.
I nt hemeant i me,peti t i onerRosaCayet anoCuencofil edapet i t i on wi t h t heCFIofRi zal( QuezonCi t y)f ort h er oft hedeceased’ sl p obat e as twi l l andf ort hei ssuanceofl i nherf avor , andt est ament e t t e r st e st ame nt ar y as t he survi vi ng wi dow and exe cut r i xi n t he sai dl ast wi l l and t est ament .
#24-Cuencovs.CourtofAppeal s
# 24 - ROSA CAYETANO CUENCO, pet i t i oner s, vs. THE
Havi ng l ear ned of t he i nt es t at e pr oce edi ng i n t he Cebu court , pet i t i onerRosafil ed i n sai d Cebu courtan Opposi t i on and Mot i on t o Di smi ss,as wel l as an Opposi t i on t o Pet i t i on f or Appoi ntment of Speci alAdmi ni st rat or .Cebu courti ssuedanorderhol di ngi nabeyance i t s re sol ut i on on pet i t i oner’ s mot i on t o di smi ss“ af t er t he CFI unt i l
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, THI RD DI VI SI ON, MANUEL
QuezonCi t yshal lhaveactedon t hepet i t i on f o rr ngs. p obat eproceedi
No.L-24742.Oct ober26,1973.
CUENCO,
LOURDES
CUENCO,
CONCEPCI ON
CUENCO
Respondent sfil edi nt heQuez on Ci t ycour tanOpposi t i on andMot i on t oDi smi ss and/ori , o nt heg r o undo fl ac ko fj ur i s di c t i o n mpr operv enue,
MANGUERRA, CARMEN CUENCO, CONSUELO CUENCO REYES. andTERESITACUENCO GONZALEZ,r es pondent s.
consi deri ngthatCFICebu al readyacqui redexcl usi vej uri sdi ct i on over t hecase.Theopposi t i on and mot i on t o di smi sswer edeni ed.Upon appeal , CA r ul ed i n f av or of re spondent s and i ss ued a wr i t of prohi bi t i ont oCFIQuezon.
FACTS:
Sen.Mar i ano JesusCuencodi ed i n Mani l a.Hewassurv i ve d by hi s wi dow,t he her ei n pet i t i oner ,and t hei r2mi norsons,al lr esi di ng i n Quezon Ci t y ,and by hi schi l dren oft he firstmarr i age,r espondent s
I SSUE( s) : 32
1.WoN CAerr edi ni ssui ngt hewri tofprohi bi t i on
provi ncei nwhi chhehadest at e.Thec o ft he o ur tfir s tt aki ngc o gni z anc e ofadecedent ,shal lexerci s e ur t othe s e t t l e me nto ft hee s t at e j i sdi c t i on
2. WoN CFI Quezon act ed wi t hout j ur i sdi ct i on or gr av e abuse of di scr et i on i nt aki ng cogni zance and assumi ng excl usi ve j uri sdi ct i on ov er t he pr obat e pr oce edi ngs i n pur suance t o CFI Cebu’ s or der expre ssl yconsent i ngi n def ere ncet ot hepre cedenceofprobat eover i nt est ateproceedi ngs
ofal lothercourt s.Th e ur byacourt ,sof ar e xc l us i o n j i sdi c t i onassumed asi tdepe nds on t he he decedent ,oroft he pl ac eo fr e si denc e oft shal lnot becont est ed i n asui torproceedi ng, l o c at i o no fhi se st at e , f r om t hatcourt ,i nt heo orwhent he exce pti nanappeal r i g i nalc a se , 8 ont her ( Rul e73) wanto fj ur i s di c t i o nappe ar s e c or d . ”
I ti sequal l yconcededt hatt her oft hedeceasedort hel ocat i on e si de nc e ofhi sestatei snot an el ementofj uri sdi ct i on overt hesubj ectmatt er butme r el yofvenue.
HELD:
TheCour tfindst hatt heappel l at ecour ter r ed i nl aw i ni ssui ng t he wr i tofpr ohi bi t i onagai nstt heQuezonCi t ycour tf r om pr oceedi ngwi t h t het est ateproceedi ngsand annul l i ngand set t i ngasi deal li t sorders andacti ons,parti cul arl yi t sadmi ssi on t oprobat eoft hedeceased’ sl ast wi l l and t est ame nt and appoi nt i ng pe t i t i oner wi dow as execut r i x t her eofwi t houtbondpursuantt othedeceasedt est at or’ sexpr esswi sh.
I tshoul dbenot edthatt heRul eonvenuedoesnotst at et hatt hecourt wi t h whom t he est at e or i nt est at e pet i t i on i s cqui res fir s t fil ed a e xc l us i v ej ur i s di c t i o n. A f ai rr eadi ng oft he Rul e—si nce i t deal s wi t h venue and comi t y bet ween cour t s ofequaland coor di nat ej ur i sdi ct i on—i ndi cat es t hat t he courtwi t h whom t hepet i t i on i s fil ed,mustal fir s t s o fir s tt ak e
The Judi ci ary Act concededl y conf er s or i gi na l ur l j i sdi c t i o n upon al
n or der t o e cogni zance of t he set t l ement of t he est at e i x e r c i s e
Court s ofFi rstI nst ance over“al lmatt ersofprobate,both oft est ate andi nt est ateest ates. ”Ont heot herhand,Rul e73,sect i onoft heRul es
j ur i sdi c t i ono v e ri tt ot heex c l usi o nofal lo t he rc our t s.
ofCourtl aysdown t herul eofvenue, as t heverycapt i on oft heRul e i ndi cat es,and i n ordert opr eventconfli ctamongthedi ffer entcourt s whi ch ot herwi sema ypr oper l yassume ;j ur i sdi ct i on f r om doi ngso,t he Rul especi fiest hat“ t hecour tr fi s tt aki ngc o gni z anc eoft hes e t t l e mentof
such court ,mayupon l earni ngt hatapeti t i on f o r r Co n v e r s e l y , p obat e oft hedecedent ’ sl astwi l lhasbeen pr esent ed i n anot hercourtwher e t hedecedentobvi ousl yhad hi sconj ugaldomi ci l eandre si ded wi t h hi s survi vi ngwi dow and t hei rmi norchi l dre n,and t hatt heal l egat i on of thei pet i t i on bef orei tst ati ngt hatthe decedentdi edi nt es t at e nt es t at e
ofadecedent ,shal le t hees t at e xe r c i s ej ur i s di c t i o nt ot hee xc l us i o no fal l Theci t edRul eprovi des: o t h erc o ur t s . ”
maybeact ual l yf al se,maydecl oft he pe t i t i o n i net ot ak ec o g ni z anc e and hol dt hepeti t i on bef orei ti n abeyance,and i nst ead def ert ot he sec ond court whi ch has bef or ei tt he pet i t i on f or he pr obat e of t de c ede nt ’ sal l e g edl as twi l l .
I ft hedecedenti s “ S ec t i o n11. Whe r ee s t at eo fde c e as e dp er s o nss e t t l e d. an i nhabi t antoft hePhi l i ppi nesatt heti meofhi sdeath,whet hera ci t i zen oran al i en,hi swi l ls hal lbepr o v e d,o rl e t t e r sofadmi ni s t r at i o n g r ant e d,a nd hi se s t at es e t t l e d,i nt he Co ur to fFi r s tI ns t anc ei nt he
TheCour tt her ef or ehol dsundert hef act sofr ecor dt hatt heCebucour t
and i fhei san P r o v i n c ei n wh i c hh er e s i de satt het i meofhi sde at h ,
n di d no ta c twi t ho utj ur i s di c t i o n no rwi t hg r av e ab us eo fdi s c r e t i o ni
i nhabi t antofa f orei gn count ry ,t he CourtofFi rs tI nst ance oft he
ot ake cog ni zance of t he i t i on and i nst ead de c l i ni ng t nt es t at e peti 33
ACCORDI NGLY,j udgme nti s her eby r ender ed r ever si ng t he appeal ed deci si on and re sol ut i on oft heCo CourtofAppeal sand t hepet i t i on f or cert i orariand prohi bi t i on wi t h prel i mi nary i nj unct i on ori gi nal l y fil ed by r espondent s wi t ht he Cour tofAppeal s( CAG. R.No.34104R)i s ordereddi smi mi ssed.Nocost s.
t othet proceedi ngsfil edj ustaweekl aterbypet i t i oner de f e r r i ng es t at e assur urvi vi ngwi wi dow anddesi gnatedexecut ri xoft hedecedent ’ sl astwi l l , si nce t he record bef orei t( t he pet i t i oner’ s opposi t i on and mot i on t o di smi mi ss)showe wedthe oft heal l egati on i nt hei pe t i t i on f f al si t y nt es t at e t hat t he dec ede nt had di ed wi l l .I ti s not ewort hy t hat t houta wi res pondent sneverchal l enged by cert i orariorprohi bi t i on pr oceedi ngs t he Cebu court ’ s or der of10 Apri l1964 def er r i ng t ot he probat e pr oceedi ngsbef oret heQu Quezon Ci t ycourt /thusl eavi ngt hel att erf r ee ( pur suant t o t he Cebu court ’ s or der of def er ence )t oe x e r c i s e andadmi tt hedecedent ’ swi l lt oprobat e. j ur i sdi c t i o n
Cas eDi gestbyYUMM M MY #25-BENNY NYSAMPI LO andHONOR ORATO SALACUP,pet i t i oner s, vs.THE COURT OFAPPEALSandFELI SA SI NOPERA,r espondent .
Fort hesame mer easons,nei t h erc o ul dt h e Qu ez o n Ci t yc o u r tb eh el dt o n hav e ac t e d wi t ho utj ur i s di c t i o n no rwi wi t hg r av e ab us eo fd i s c r e t i o ni
FACTS:
admi t t i ng t hedecedent ’ swi l lt o probat eand appoi nt i ngpeti t i oneras execut ri xi n accordancewi wi t hi t stest ame ment arydi sposi t i on,i nt hel i ght oft he set t l ed doct ri ne t hatthe pr ovi si ons ofRul e 73,sect i on 1 l ay down wnonl yarul eofvenue, no tofj ur i s di c t i o n.
I n January1945,Teodoro Tol et edi ed i nt est at e.Hel ef t4l ands i n San Manuel ,Pangasi nan.Hei r sl ef twer ehi swi dow,Leonci adeLeon and se ve r al nephews and ni ec es . On Jul y 1946, wi wi t hout any j udi ci al proceedi ng,Leonci aexecut ed an affid ffi davi tst at i ngthatshei st heonl y hei roft hedecedentt oi nheri tt hesai d pr opert i es.Such affid ffi davi twas r egi st er edwi wi t ht heROD ofPangasi nan.Ont hesame meday,Leonci aal so exe cut ed adeedofsal ei nf avorofBennySamp mpi l of or10k whi ch was al soregi st eredi nsai dRO ROD.
Fi nal l y,i tshoul d benot ed t hati nt heSupreme meCourt ’ sexerci seofi t s 22 supervi sory aut hori t y over al li nf eri or court s, i t ma may proper l y det ermi mi ne,asi thasdonei nt hecaseatbar ,t hatvenue wa p s r o per l y byandt t otheQuezonCi andt hati ti sthe ass ume me d r ans f e r r e d t ycourt i nt er estofj ust i ceand i n avoi danceofneedl essdel ayt hatt heQuezon Ci t y court ’ s exerci se of j uri sdi ct i on over t he t est ate est ate of the decedent and i t sadmi ssi on t opr obat eofhi sl astwi l landtest ame ment andappoi nt mentofpet i t i oner wi dow asadmi ni st rat ri xwi wi t houtbondi n pursuanceoft hedecedent ’ sexpresswi l landal li t sordersandact i ons t aken i nt hetes t at epr oceedi ngsbef orei tbeapprov ed and aut hori zed rat hert han t oannulal lsuch proceedi ngsre gul arl yhad andtor epeat and dupl i cat et he same me proc eedi ngs bef or et he Cebu courtonl yt o r ev er toncemo mor et ot heQuez on Ci t ycour tshoul dt heCebu courtfind t hati ndeed and i nf act ,asal r eady det er mi ned by t he Quez on Ci t y court on t he st r ength of i ncont r over t i bl e documentary evi dence of rec ord,QuezonCi t ywast heconj ugalr esi denceoft hedecedent .
On Mar ch, 1950, Fel i saSi noper a i nst i t ut ed proc eedi ngs f or t he admi ni st rat i on oft heest at eoft hel at eTeodoro.Meanwhi l e,on June 17,1950,Samp mpi l o,i nt urn,sol dthel andst oHo Honorat oSal acupf or50k. Thesal ewasal sor egi st er edi nt heROD.
On June 20, 1950, Si noper a, t hen as appoi nt ed admi mi ni st r at r i x, br ought t hi s pr esent act i on agai nst Sampi l o and Sal acup on t he gr ound t hatLeonci a had no ri ghtt o exe cut et he affid ffidavi t .Not i ceof 34
l i spendenswasre cor dedont hecer t i ficate sonJune26,1950.
Thel awsgover ni ngsuch casear eSect i ons1 and 4 ofRul e74 ( codal pl ease;savi ngspace) .
:i nf avorofSi nopera;t he affid ffi davi twas decl are d nul land voi d; CFI Bytheti t l eofSecti on 4,t he"di st ri but eesand estate"i ti ndi cat esthe personstoanswerf orri ght svi ol ated by t heext raj udi ci alset t l eme ment . On t he ot herhand,i ti sal sosi gni ficantt hatno ment i on i s made expre ssl yoft heeffectoft heext raj udi ci alse t t l eme menton personswh who di dnott akepartt her ei norhadnonot i ceorknowl edget her eof .
decl ar ed Si noper a owner of ½ of t he 4 l ands; de cl ar ed t hat t he usuf ruct uaryri ght sofLeonci at osai dpropert i esaret ermi mi nated.
fied t hej udgment ;t hedeedsofsal ewerev oi donl yi nsof aras CA:modi t he proper t i es convey ed exc eed t he port i on t hat cor r esponds t o Leonci a;Sal acupwasor deredt odel i vert oSi nopera½ oft hel andsi n t hecomp mpl ai nt f ordi sposi t i on butreservedhi sri ghtt osecuret hatpart whi ch bel onged t o Leonci a and hi sr i ghtt o br i ng an act i on agai nst Leonci aandSamp mpi l of ordama mages .
Ther ecannotbeanydoubtt hatt hosewhot ookpar torhadknowl edge oft heextr aj udi ci alset t l eme mentarebound t hereby.Ast othem, m ,t hel aw i scl eart hati ft heycl ai mt ohavebeeni nanyma mannerdepri vedoft hei r l awf wf ulri ghtorsharei nt heestatebytheext raj udi ci alsett l eme ment ,they maydema mandt hei rr i ght sori nt er estwi t hi nt heperi odoft woyears,and bot ht hedi st r i but eesandest at ewoul dbel i abl et ot hem f orsuchr i ght s ori nt e r e s t .
Samp mpi l oand Sal acup appeal edtot heSC al l egi ngt hatt heact i on has al r eady pre scr i bed si nce i ts houl d have been comm mmenced wi t hi n2 year s and butwas onl y fil ed 4 year s af t er t he r egi st r at i on oft he affid ffidavi t .
Butast othosew wh hodi d nott akeparti nt heset t l eme mentorhad no not i ceoft hedeath oft hedecedentoroft hesett l eme ment ,t her ei sno di rectorexpressprovi si on t hatt heyal so berequi red t oassertt hei r cl ai ms wi t hi nt he peri od oft wo year s.To ext end t he effect s oft he se t t l eme ment t ot hem, m, t ot hose who di d not t ake par t or had no knowl edge t her eof ,wi t houtanyexpre ssl egalprovi si on t ot hateffect , woul dbevi ol at i veoft hef undame nt alr i ghtt oduepr ocessofl aw.
nopera' sri ghtofact i on t orecoverherandhercohei rs' I SSUE UE:WON Si part i ci pati on t othel andsi nquest i on prescri bedatt heti metheacti on t orecoverwasfil ed.
Nope.Notyet .CAdeci si onwasaffir ffi rme medi nt ot o. SCRU RULI NG: G: The pr ocedur e out l i ned i n Sect i on 1 of Rul e 74 of ext r aj udi ci al set t l eme ment ,orbyaffid ffi davi t ,i san expart eproceedi ng.I tc annotbyany r eason or l ogi c be cont ended t hatsuch set t l eme ment or di st ri but i on 35
woul daffectt hi r dper sonswhohadnoknowl edgeei t heroft hedeat hof t hedecedentoroft heext raj udi ci alse t t l eme mentoraffi ffid davi t ,especi al l yas nome ment i onofsucheffecti sma made,ei t herdi rect l yorbyi mpl i cati on.
# 26 - I N THE MATTER OF THE I NTESTATE ESTATE OF DECEASED I SMA MAEL REYES,THE HEI RS OF OSCAR R. REYES, peti ti oners, vs.
Thepr ovi si onsofSect i on 4 ofRul e74,bar r i ng di st r i but eesorhei r s f rom obj ecti ngtoan extraj udi ci alpart i t i on aft ert heexpi rati on oft wo year sf r om suchext r aj udi ci alpar t i t i on,i sappl i cabl eonl y:
CESAR R.REYES,r es pondent.
SpousesI sma maelReye sandFel i saRevi t aReye saret heowner s FACTS: ofl ands i n Cubao,QC.Theyhave7 chi l dre n.On Apri l1973,I sma mael Reyesdi edi nt estat e.
( 1)t oper sonswh whohavepart i ci pat edort akenpartorhadnot i ceoft he extr aj udi ci alpart i t i on,and,i n addi t i on,( 2)when t he provi si ons of Sect i on 1ofRul e74havebeen st ri ct l ycomp mpl i edwi t h,i . e. ,t hatal lt he per sonsorhei rsoft hedecedenthavetaken parti nt heextr aj udi ci al set t l eme mentorarer epresent edbythems msel vesort hr oughguardi ans.
Pri ort o hi sdeat h,I sma maelwasnot i fied by t he BI R ofan i ncome met ax defici ency ari si ng f r om hi s sal e ofa l and i n TandangSora,QC.For f ai l ur et o pay,t hetaxi ncr eased t o about172k+ and si ncehi shei rs al sodi d notpaysuch t ax,oneoft hel andsi n Cubaowa wasl evi ed,s ol d andf orf ei t edi nf avoroft heGovernment .
Thecaseatbarf ai l st ocompl ywi t h bot hr equi r eme nt sbecausenotal l thehei rsi nt erest edhaveparti ci patedi ntheextraj udi ci alsett l eme ment .
I n 1976,OscarReyes,son ofI sma mael ,avai l edoft heBI R’ st axamn mnest y andwa wasabl et oredeem t hepropert y .Al soi n May ,1982,anot i cewas sentt oFel i saf r om t heOffi Officeoft heCi t yTreasurerofQC i nf ormi mi ngher t hatt heCu Cubaopropert i eswi wi l lbeauct i oned f orherf ai l ur etopayt he r eale st at et ax del i nquency f r om 19741981.Oscaragai n set t l ed t he acc ount st hrough an amn mnest ycomp mpr omi mi seagr ee mentwi t ht he Ci t y Tr easur er .
Mor eov er ,t he act i on i s one based on f r aud, as the wi dow oft he deceased owneroft hel andshad decl are di n heraffid ffidavi tofpart i t i on t hat t he deceased l ef t no nephews or ni ece,or ot her hei r s except her sel f . Pl ai nt i ff' s ri ght whi ch i s based on f r aud and whi ch has a peri od off ouryear s,doesnotappeart ohavel apsedwhen t heact i on wasi nst i t ut ed.Judi ci alpr oceedi ngswher ei nst i t ut ed i n Mar ch,1950 and t hese pr ocee di ngs must have been i nst i t ut ed soon af t er t he di scoveryoff raud.
I n May,1989,Cesar,brot her ,fil ed apet i t i on f ori ssuanceofl et t ersof 36
admi ni st r at i on wi t ht heRTC ofQC pray i ng f orhi sappoi nt mentas admi ni st rat oroft hei rf ather’ sest at ewhi ch i ncl udes½ oft heCubao proper t i es.Oscaropposed on t he gr ound t hathe had acqui r ed t he propert i esbyredempt i onand/orpur chase.
Thesubj ectpr oper t i esar est i l lt i t l ed undert heTor r enssyst em i nt he namesofspousesI smaelandFel i saRevi t aReyeswhi chundert hel aw i sendowedwi t hi ncont est abi l i t yunt i laf t eri thasbeen setasi dei nt he manner i ndi cat ed i n t he l aw. The decl ar at i on of t he pro vi si onal characteroft hei ncl usi on oft hesubj ectpropert i esi nt hei nvent oryas st ressedi nt heorderi swi t hi nt hej uri sdi ct i on oft heProbat eCourt .
RTC:i nf avorofCesar;propert i eswer eprovi si onal l yi ncl uded i nt he est at e.Oscarappeal edbutwhi l ependi ng,hedi edandwassubsti t ut ed byhi shei r s.
Set t l edi st herul ethatt heRTC act i ngasaprobat ecourtexer ci sesbut l i mi t ed j uri sdi ct i on,t husi thasno powert ot akecogni zanceofand det ermi ne t he i ssue oft i t l et o propert y cl ai med by a t hi r d person adver sel ytothe decedent ,unl essthe cl ai mantand al lot herpart i es havi ngl egali nt eresti nt hepropert yconsent ,expressl yori mpl i edl y,t o t hesubmi ssi onoft hequest i ont ot heProbat eCourtf oradj udgment ,or t hei nt erest soft hi rdpersonsarenott herebyprej udi ced.
CA:affirmed,MR deni ed,hence,prese ntact i on.
WON t heCubaoproper t i escanbei ncl udedi nt hees t at e.WON I SSUE: t het ri alcourtshoul dnotdet ermi nequest i ononownershi p.
Thef act sobt ai ni ngi nt hi scase,however ,donotcal lf ort heappl i cat i on oft heexcept i on t ot herul e.I tbearsst re ssthatt hepurposewhyt he probatecourtal l owed t hei nt r oduct i on ofevi denceon owner shi p was f orthe sol e purpose ofdet ermi ni ng whet hert he subj ectproper t i es shoul dbei ncl uded i nt hei nventorywhi chi swi t hi nt heprobatecourt s compet ence.
SCRULI NG: Yes.
Thej ur i sdi ct i on oft hepr obat ecour tme r el yr el at est omat t er shavi ng t o do wi t ht he set t l ementoft he est at e and t he probateofwi l l s of deceas ed per sons, and t he appoi nt ment and r emoval of admi ni st r at ors ,exec ut ors ,guardi ans and t rust ees.The quest i on of owner shi pi sasarul e,an ext r aneousmat t erwhi cht heProbateCourt cannotre sol ve wi t h final i t y.Thus,f or t he purpose ofdet er mi ni ng whet hera cer t ai n pr oper t y shoul d orshoul d notbei ncl uded i nt he i nvent oryofes t at epr oceedi ng,t hepr obat ecourtmaypassupon t he t i t l etheret o,butsuchdet ermi nati on i sprovi si onal ,notconcl usi ve,and i ssubj ectt othefinaldeci si on i naseparat eacti on t oresol veti t l e.
Ther ewasnot hi ngon r ecor dt hatbot h par t i essubmi t t ed t hei ssueof ownershi pf ori t sfinalresol ut i on.
I nf act ,theprobatecourt ,awareofi t sl i mi t edj uri sdi cti on decl aredthat 37
i t s det er mi nat i on of t he owner shi p was mer el y prov i si onal and suggest edt hatei t hert headmi ni st rat orort hewi dow Fel i saReyesmay commencet heproperact i oni nt heRegi onalTri alCourt .
WO heRTC hasj ur i sdi ct i on. I SSUE : Nt
Yes.Thecasewast ober e t ur nedt ot hepr obat ecour tf or SC RULI NG: t he l i qui dat i on of t he conj ugal part ner shi p of Te odor o and Lucreci aResel vapri ort otheset t l ementoft heestat eofTeodoro.
Thequest i onofowner shi pofapr oper t yal l egedt obepar toft heest at e mustbe submi t t ed t othe Regi onalTri alCourti nt heexerci seofi t s g ene r alj ur i s di c t i o n.
Thel ong st andi ng r ul ei st hatpr obat e cour t s,ort hose i n char geof procee di ngs whet her t est at e or i nt est at e, cannot adj udi cat e or det ermi net i t l et opropert i escl ai medt obepartoft heestat eandwhi ch arecl ai med t obel ongtoout si departi es.St atedotherwi se," cl ai msf or t i t l et o,orri ghtofpossessi on of ,personalorrealpropert y,madebythe hei rst hemsel ves,byt i t l eadverset othatoft hedeceased,ormadeby t hi rdper sons,cannotbeent ert ai nedbyt hepr obat ecourt . "
#27-MI LAGROSA.CORTES,pet i t i oner , vs. COURT OF APPEALS and MENANDRO A. RESELVA, respondents. FACTS:MenandroResel va,Mi l agrosCort es,and Fl orant eResel va are
br ot her sandsi st erandchi l dr en -hei r soft hel at espousesTeodor oT. Resel vaandLucr eci aAgui rr eResel va,whodi edon Apri l11,1989 and May13,1987,r espect i vel y .Thepar ent sowneda houseand l ot( more orl ess100sq.m. )i nTondo,Mani l a.
I nt he pre sentcase ,howev er ,Menandro,who r ef used t o vacat et he houseandl otcannotbeconsi der edan " out si depart y"f orhei soneof t het hr eecompul soryhei r soft hef ormer .Assuch,hei sverymuch i nvol vedi ntheset t l ementofTeodoro' sestate.
The f at herexecut ed a hol ogr aphi c wi l lwhi ch was pr obat ed i n Jul y , 1991 wi t h Mi l agrosas t he execut ri x.Ther eaf t er ,s he fil ed a mot i on bef or er espondentpr obat ecour tpr ayi ngt hatMe nandr o,t heoccupant oft hehouseand l ot ,beor deredtovacat et hepr opert yand t urnover t hepossessi ont oher .Thi swasgrant ed.
Bywayofexcept i on t ot heabovement i onedrul e," whent hepart i esare al lhei rsoft hedecedent ,i ti sopti onalupon t hem t o submi tt ot he probat ecourtt hequest i on oft i t l etoproperty . "Here,t heprobat ecourt i scompet entt odeci de t hequest i on ofowner shi p.Mor eso,when t he opposi ngpart i esbel ongt othepoorst rat um ofsoci et yandaseparat e act i onwoul dbemostexpensi veandi nexpedi ent .
CA r ev er sedsuch deci si on f orhavi ngbeen i ssued beyond t heRTC’ s l i mi t edj uri sdi ct i on asaprobat ecourt .Hence,appealbyMi l agros.
38
I n addi t i on,Menandro' s cl ai m i s notatal ladver seto,ori n confli ct wi t ht hatof ,t hedecedentsi ncet hef or me r ' st heoryme r el yadvances co-ownershi pwi t ht hel att er .I nt hesameway,whent hecont rov ersyi s whet hert hepr oper t yi ni ssuebel ongst ot heconj ugalpar t ner shi p or exc l usi ve l y t o t he decedent ,t he same i s proper l y wi t hi n t he j ur i sdi ct i onoft hepr obat ecour t ,whi chnecessar i l yhast ol i qui dat et he conj ugalpart ner shi pi n ordert odet ermi net heest at eoft hedecedent whi chi st obedi st r i but edamongt hehei r s.
TESTATE ESTATE OF THE LATE GREGORI O VENTURA MARI A
ri x- appel l ant VENTURA, execut , MI GUEL VENTURA and JUANA CARDONA,
hei r sappel l ant s,
vs. GREGORI A VENTURA and HER HUSBAND,EXEQUI EL VI CTORI O, MERCEDES VENTURA and HER HUSBAND,PEDRO D.CORPUZ,
opposi t ors-appel l ees.
FACTS:
Morei mportant l y,t hecaseatbarf al l ssquarel yunderRul e73,Sect i on 2oft heRevi sedRul esofCourt ,t hus:
Appel l ant Mar i a Vent ur a i st he i l l egi t i mat e daught er of t he deceased Gr egor i o Vent ura whi l e Mi guel Vent ura and Juana Car donaarehi sson and sa vi ng spousewho ar eal sothebrot her
RULE73
he ot her hand, appel and mot her of Mar i a Vent ura. On t l ees Mer cedes and Gr egor i a Vent ura ar et he deceased' sl egi t i mat e chi l dren wi thhi sf ormerwi f e,thel atePaul i naSi mpl i ci ano( Record on Appeal ,p.122)butt he pater ni t y ofappel l eeswasdeni ed by
SEC. 2. Wher e es t at e upon di ss ol ut i on of mar r i age . - When t he marr i age i s di ssol ve d by t he deat h of t he husband or wi f e,t he communi t y pr oper t y shal l be i nvent or i ed, admi ni st er ed, and l i qui dat ed,and t he debts t her eofpai d,i nt he t est at e or i nt est at e proceedi ngsoft he deceased spouse.I fboth spouseshavedi ed,t he conj ugalpart ner shi p shal lbe l i qui dat ed i nt he t est at e or i nt est at e proceedi ngsofei t her . "
thedeceased i nhi swi l l ( Recordon Appeal ,p.4) .
On Dec ember 14, 1953, Gr ego r i o Vent ur a fil ed a pet i t i on f or the probat eofhi swi l lwhi chdi dnoti ncl udetheappel l eesandt hepet i t i on wasdocket edasSpeci alPr oceedi ngsNo.812( Recor donAppeal ,pp.13) .I n t he sai d wi l l ,t he appel l ant Mari a Vent ur a, al t hough an i l l egi t i mat echi l d,wasnamed and appoi nt ed by t het est at ort obet he execut ri x ofhi s wi l land t he admi ni st rat ri x ofhi s est at e( Record on Appeal ,p.7) .
Casedi gestbyJune
On Januar y 25, 1961, Mar i a Vent ura fil ed a mot i on t o hol di n abeyancethe approvaloft he account sofadmi ni st r at i on ort o have t hei rappr ovalwi t houtt heopposi t i on oft hespousesMer cedesVent ura and PedroCor puzand Gr egor i a Vent ur a and Exequi el Vi ct or i o on t he gr ound t hatt hequest i on oft hepat er ni t yofMer cedesVenturaand
CaseNo.28 G. R.No.L26306Apri l27,1988 39
Gr egori a Vent ur ai s st i l l pendi ng final det er mi nat i on bef ore t he Supr eme Courtand t hat shoul dt hey be adj udged the adul t er ous chi l dren oft estat or,as cl ai med,they arenotent i t l ed t oi nheri tnorto oppose t he appr oval oft he count s of admi ni st r at i on ( Recor d on Appeal s,pp.3336) .
t hest r ongestgr oundf orpref er encei stheamountorpreponderanceof i nt erest .Asbet ween nextofki n,t henearestofki ni st obepref erred." As deci ded by t he l ower cour t and sust ai ned by t he Supr eme
cedesand Gr egori a Vent ur a aret hel egi t i mat echi l dren of Court ,Mer Gregori oVent uraandhi swi f e,t hel atePaul i naSi mpl i ci ano.Theref ore, ast henearestofki nofGregori oVent uratheyareent i t l edt opref erence overt hei l l egi t i mat echi l dr en ofGre gori oVent ura,namel y:Mari a and Mi guelVent ura.Hence,undert heaf orest at ed pref erenceprovi ded i n Sect i on 6 of Rul e 78, t he per son or per so ns t o be appoi nt ed admi ni st r at or ar e Juana Car dona, as t he surv i vi ng spouse, or Mer cedesand Gr egor i a Vent ur aasnear es tofki n,orJuanaCar dona andMer cedesand Gr egori aVent ur ai nt hedi scr et i on oft heCourt ,i n ordert orepresentbothi nt erest s.
Hence,t hi sappeal . Gr egori a and Mer cedesVenturacl ai med t hatt heyaret hel egi t i mat e chi l dren ofGr egori o Vent ur a and hi s wi f e Paul i na Si mpl i ci ano,who di ed i n 1943,and asked t hatonehal foft hepr opert i esdescri bed i n t hecompl ai ntbedecl aredast heshareoft hei rmot heri nt heconj ugal part ner shi p,wi t ht hem astheonl yf orcedhei rsoft hei rmot herPaul i na ( Joi ntBri eff ortheAppel l ant s,pp.53-68) .
I SSUE:
Whet herornott he r emo valofMar i a Vent ur a as execut r i xi sl egal l y j ust i fied.
CaseNo.29 G. R.No.L7019
May31,1955
I nthematt erofthei ntest ateest ateofthedeceased
HELD:
admi ni st rator -appel l ee, Rosal i aSaqui t an.EULOGI O S.EUSEBI O, vs.
The Supr eme Cour t hel dt hat t he r emo val of Mar i a Vent ur a as execut ri xi sl egal l yj ust i fied.I nt hecaseatbar,t hesurvi vi ngspouseof t hedeceasedGr egori oVenturai sJuanaCardonawhi l et henextofki n ar e:Mer ce desand Gr eg or i a Vent ura and Mar i a and Mi guelVent ur a. The" nextofki n"hasbeen defined ast hoseper sonswhoar eent i t l ed undert hest atut eofdi st ri but i on t othedecedent ' spropert y( Coopervs. Cooper ,43 I nd.A.620,88 NE 341) .I ti s general l y sai dt hat" t he nearestofki n,whose i nt ere sti nt heestat ei smorepre ponderant ,i s pref er r ed i nt hechoi ceofadmi ni st r at or .' Among membersofacl ass
opposi t orappel l antdeceased. DOMI NGO VALMORES, JACI NTA SI SCAR,wi dow ofdeceased, opposi t orappel l ant . FACTS:
OnJul y31,1952,t heaboveent i t l edproceedi ngswer ei nst i t ut edi nt he t i on ofFranci sco CourtofFi rstI nstanceofRi zal ,upon peti Val mor es,whocl ai mst obet headopt edsonoft hespouses 40
havehappened:Domi ngoVal mor esdi edonMay13,1954.( Accor di ng t othecerti ficateofdeath,hewas85yearsol datt het i meofhi sdeath. I tappearst hatt hesai dopposi t orwasmarri edf ort hesecondt i met o Jaci nt aSi scaronJanuar y6,1952) .Uponbei ngnot i fiedoft hedeat hof Domi ngoVal mor es,t hi sCourtorder edt hewi dow subst i t ut edf ort he deceasedappel l ant .
Thepet i t i on al l egest hat Domi ngoVal mor esandRosal i aSaqui t an. Rosal i aSaqui t an di edi nPasi g,Ri zalonOct ober1,1950,wi t hout l eavi nganydecendantorascendant ;t hatt henearestrel ati vesofsai d decedentaret hehusband,Domi ngoVal more s,andthepet i t i oner Fr anci scoVal more s;andt hatt hesurvi vi ngspouseDomi ngoVal more s i smoret han 80 yearsofageandphysi cal l yunfitt odi scharget he hepet i t i onerr ecommendst he dut i esofadmi ni st rator ,sot
I SSUES:
.Ont hesameday appoi nt mentofEul ogi oEusebi oasadmi ni st r at or oft hepresent ati on oft hepet i t i on,t heCl erkofcourti ssuedanoti ce set t i ngadate( August29,1952)f ort heheari ngoft hepet i t i onand orderi ngt hepubl i cati on oft henoti cei nt henewspaper" LaOpi ni on. " Ont hedaysetf ort heheari ng,nooneappearedexceptc ounself ort he pet i t i onerFranci scoVal mores.Franci scoVal moreshi msel fdi dnot appear.Counself orthepet i t i onerprovedt hepubl i cati onoft henoti ce
1. Whet hert hepeti t i onercanbedesi gnat edast headmi ni st r at orof theest ateofthedeceased. 2. Whet hert henot i cet otheper sonshavi ngani nt er esti nt he propert i esoft hedeceasedcan bedi spensewi t h.
entedhi swi t ness ,onebythename ofheari ngand,af t erwards,pres HELD:
ofRaymundoDel mi ndo,whodecl ar edthathei st hebr otherof Fr anci scoVal mores t hathi sbrot herhadbeenadopt edbyt he
Theevi dencesubmi t t edi nt hehear i ngdoesnotsat i sf act or i l ypr ove t hatt hepet i t i onerwasl egal l yadopt ed;hence,hedi dnothaveany i nt eresti nt hepropert i esoft hedeceasedRosal i aSaqui t an.
spousesDomi ngoVal mor esandRosal i aSaqui t an,t hatRosal i aSaqui t an di dnotl eaveanywi l l ,thathernearestrel ati vei shersurvi vi ng husbandwhoi s80year sofageandi ncapabl eofadmi ni st er i ngt he e s t a t e T . her eaf t ert hef ol l owi ngpr oceedi ngsf ort heset t l eme ntoft he est atet ookpl acei nrapi dsuccessi on.
Ast udyoft her ecor dsal sodi scl osesf at ali r r egul ar i t i esi nt henot i ce r equi re dtobegi ven.Thusnowher edoesi tappearf r om t her ecordt hat Domi ngoVal moreswaseverper sonal l ynot i fiedoft hefil i ngoft he pet i t i onoroft het i meandpl acef orheari ngthesame.Hi sfirst opposi t i onshowst hathewasnotawareoft heheari ngatal l .Hewas not i fiedoft heproceedi ngsf ort hefirstt i mewhent hei nvent orywas senthi m onNovember29,1952.Sect i on3ofRul e80oft heRul esof Courtprovi des:
OnMar ch23,1953t hesurv i vi ngspouseDomi ngoVal mor espr ese nt ed anopposi t i ondat edMarc h20,1953,i mpugni ngt heappoi nt mentof Eul ogi oEusebi oasadmi ni st rat oront hegroundt hathei sast rangert o t hef ami l yandt ohi msel f ,andprayi ngt hathebeappoi nt ed admi ni st rat oroft hepropert i esoft hedeceased,andthatt hecasebe setf orheari ngsothathecan pr esenthi sevi dence.OnApri l4,1953 hepresentedanamendedopposi t i on,al l egi ngt hatRosal i aSaqui t an haddi edmor et hant woyearsbef ore ,t hathehadbeenadmi ni st er i ng t hepropert i esofherdeceasedwi f e,t hathei snow t heownerand possessoroft hepr opert i esi nquest i on,whi chwasval uedatP45, 914. Si ncet hependencyoft hecasebef oret hi sCourt ,t hef ol l owi ngevent s
Whenapet i t i onf orl et t er sofadmi ni st r at i oni sfil edi nt hecour thavi ng j ur i sdi ct i on,suchcour tshal lfixat i meandpl acef orhear i ngt he pe t i t i o n,and s hal lc a us e no t i c et he r e o ft obegi v e nt ot hekno wnhe i r s andc r e d i t o r so ft hede c e de ntandt oa nyo t he rp er s o nsb el i e v e dt ohav e
nt hemannerprovi ded i nsect i ons3and4of ani nt e r e s ti nt hees t at e,i 41
Rul e77.( Emphasi ssuppl i ed. )
deceasedt oappearandcont esti nduet i met heri ghtoft hepeti t i oner ort heappoi nt mentoft hepersonre commendedasadmi ni st r at or .
Theknownhei ri nt hi scasewasDomi ngoVal mor esandnot i ceshoul d havebeengi venhi mi naccor dancewi t hSect i on3and4ofRul e77. Sect i on 4ofRul e77speci al l yprovi des: TheCour tshal lal socausecopi esoft henot i ceoft het i meandpl ace fixedf orprovi ngthewi l lt obeaddr e s s e dt ot h ek no wnh ei r s ,l e g at e e s oft hetest atorresi denti nt hePhi l i ppi nesatt hei rpl aceof anddevi sees res i dence,anddeposi t edi nt hepostofficewi t ht hepost agepr epai dat l eastt went ydaysbef oret heheari ng,i fsuchpl acesofresi dencebe known.
CaseNo.30
.. . . P er s onals er v i c eofc o pi e do ft heno t i c eatl e as tt e nday sbe f o r et he
I N RE:I NTESTATE ESTATE OF THE LATE PI O DURAN.CI PRI ANO
dayo fh e ar i ngshal lb ee q ui v al e ntt omai l i ng .
DURAN
G. R.No.L23372
and
June14,1967
MI GUEL
DURAN,
pet i t i oner sappel l ant s,
vs.
Sect i on5oft hesamerul eal sorequi re s:
JOSEFI NA B.DURAN, movant opposi t orandappel l ee.
Att hehear i ngcompl i ancewi t ht hepr ovi si onsoft hel astt wopr ecedi ng sect i onsmustbeshownbef oret hei nt r oduct i onoft est i monyi n supportoft hewi l l .Al lsucht est i monyshal lbet akenunderoat hand reducedt owri t i ng.
FACTS:
Pi o Duran di ed wi t hout t es t ament on Febr uary 28, 1961 i n Gui nobat anAl bay .Among hi s al l eg ed hei r s ar e Jose fina Dur an,as survi vi ngspouse;sever albr ot hersandsi st er s;nephewsandni eces.
Ther ecor dsoft hehear i ngdonotshow t hatt henot i cesasabove r equi r edhadbeengi ve nt oDomi ngoVal mor esorMaxi moSaqui t an.
Subsequentt ohi sdeath,onJune2,1962,Ci pri anoDur an,oneoft he survi vi ng bro t her s, exec ut ed a publ i ci nst r ument assi gni ng and r enounci ng hi s her edi t ary ri ght st ot he decedent ' s est atei nf avorof JosefinaDur an,f ort heconsi der at i onofP2, 500. 00.
We ,t her ef or e,findt hatt heer r ori mput edt ot het r i alcour ti n opposi t or appel l ant ' sbri eft hatt hecourthasf ai l edt ocompl ywi t ht he provi si onsofSect i on3and5ofRul e80 hadnotbeencompl i edwi t h, wasact ual l ycommi t t ed.Ther equi r eme ntast onot i cei sessent i alt o t heval i di t yoft hepr oceedi ngsi nordert hatnoper sonmaybedepri ved ofhi sri ghtorpropert ywi t houtdueprocessofl aw.Theabsenceof not i cet ohei rsbecomest hemoreapparenti nt hecaseatbar ,wher e evi dent l yastr angerhasbeenabl et orai l roadt heproceedi ngsi ncourt wi t houtoppor t uni t yoft heper sonmosti nt er est edi nt heest at eoft he
A yearl at er ,on June8,1963,Ci pr i ano Dur an fil ed i nt he Cour tof Fi rstI nstanceofAl bayapet i t i on f ori nt estat eproceedi ngst osett l ePi o Duran' sest at e,f urt heraski ngt hathebenamedtheadmi ni st rat or .An i on t obeappoi nt edspeci aladmi ni st rat orwasal sofil edby e xpar t emot hi m. 42
Agai nst sai d pet i t i on,Josefina Dur an fil ed on August 9,1963 an opposi t i on, prayi ng f or i t s di smi ssal upon t he gr ound t hat t he pet i t i oneri s notan " i nt erest ed person"i nt he est ate,i n vi ew oft he deed oft ransf erand renunci ati on t heestat e,i n vi ew ofaf orest ated, sheaskedtobeappoi nt edadmi ni st rat ri x.
( Hernandezv .Andal ,78 Phi l .196) .Shoul di tbe cont ended t hatsai d part i t i on was att ended wi t hf raud,l esi on ori nadequacy ofpri ce,t he r emedy i st or es ci nd or t o annul t he same i n an act i on f or t hat pur pose. And i nt he meanwhi l e, ass i gni ng hei r cannot i ni t i at ea set t l ementproceedi ngs,f orunt i lt hedeedofassi gnmenti sannul l edor r esci nded,i ti sdeemed val i d and effect i veagai nsthi m,sot hathei s l e f twi t ho utt hat" i nt e r e s t "i nt hee s t at er e q ui r e dt ope t i t ef o rs e t t l e me nt proceedi ngs.
Act i ngon sai d mo t i ons,on June3,1964,t heCour tofFi r stI nst ance i ssued an orderdi smi ssi ng t he pet i t i on ofCi pri ano f orhi sl ack of i nt eresti nt heest ate.Sai dl ack ofi nt erestwaspremi sedon t hedeedof t ransf erexecut edbyCi pri ano,regardi ngwhi cht hecourtdecl aredi t sel f wi t houtpowert oexami nei n sai dpr oceedi ngs,col l at er al l y ,t heal l eged f raud,i nadequacy ofpri ceand l esi on t hatwoul d renderi tresci ssi bl e orvoi dabl e.And wi t ht hepet i t i on' sdi smi ssal ,Mi guel ' spet i t i on t o be j oi nedascopet i t i onerwasdeeme dwi t houtl egt ost andon.
I SSUE:
Whet herornott he r emovalofMar i a Vent ur a as execut r i xi sl egal l y j ust i fied.
The Rul es ofCour tpr ovi des t hata pet i t i on f or admi ni st r at i on and set t l ementofan est at emustbefil edbyan " i nt er est edperson"( See.2, Rul e79) .Appel l ant scont end t hatt hedeedofassi gnmentexecut edby Ci pri anodi dnotoperat et orenderhi m apers onwi t houti nt er esti nt he e s t a t e .
HELD:
The Supr eme Cour t hel dt hat t he r emoval of Mar i a Vent ur a as execut ri xi sl egal l yj ust i fied.I nthecaseatbar,thesurvi vi ngspouseof t hedeceasedGr egori oVenturai sJuanaCardonawhi l et henextofki n ar e:Mer ce desand Gr eg or i a Vent ur a and Mar i a and Mi guelVent ura. The" nextofki n"hasbeen defined ast hoseper sonswhoar eent i t l ed undert hest atut eofdi st ri but i on t othedecedent ' spropert y( Coopervs. Cooper ,43 I nd.A.620,88 NE 341) .I ti s general l y sai dt hat" t he nearestofki n,whose i nt er esti nt heestat ei smorepr eponderant ,i s pref er r ed i nt he choi ceofadmi ni st r at or .' Among membersofa cl ass t hest r ongestgr oundf orpref er encei stheamountorpreponderanceof i nt erest .Asbet ween nextofki n,t henearestofki ni st obepref erred."
I SSUE: Whet hert hePet i t i oneri sa personi ni nt eresti nt heest ateof
t hedecedent . HELD:
I nt he pre sent case ,howev er ,t he assi gnment t ook pl ace when no set t l ementpr oceedi ngswaspendi ng.Thepropert i essubj ectmat t erof t heassi gnmentwer enotundert hej uri sdi ct i on ofaset t l ementcourt . Al l owi ngt hatt heassi gnme ntmustbedeeme d apar t i t i on asbet ween t heassi gnorand assi gnee,t hesamedoesnotneedcourtapprovalt o beeffect i veasbet xt r a j udi c i alpar t i t i o ni sv al i das we e nt hep ar t i e s.Ane bet ween t hepar t i ci pant seven i ft her equi si t esofSec.1,Rul e74 f or extraj udi ci alpart i t i on are notf ol l owed,si nce sai d requi si t es are f or pur poses of bi ndi ng cr edi t or s and non-part i ci pat i ng hei r s onl y
As deci ded by t he l ower cour t and sust ai ned by t he Supr eme
cedesand Gr egori a Vent ur a aret hel egi t i mat echi l dren of Court ,Mer Gregori oVent uraandhi swi f e,t hel atePaul i naSi mpl i ci ano.Theref ore, 43
ast henearestofki nofGregori oVent urat heyareent i t l edt opref erence overt hei l l egi t i mat echi l dr en ofGr egori oVent ura,namel y:Mari a and Mi guelVent ura.Hence,undert heaf orest at ed pref er enceprovi ded i n Sect i on 6 of Rul e 78, t he per son or per sons t o be appoi nt ed admi ni st r at or ar e Juana Car dona, as t he surv i vi ng spouse, or Mer cedesand Gr egor i a Vent ur a asnear es tofki n,orJuanaCar dona and Mer cedesandGr egori aVent ur ai nt hedi scr et i on oft heCourt ,i n ordert orepresentbothi nt erest s.
Vi cent eandMaxi maandt heest at eofLeonar do.I t ,l i kewi se,pr ayedf or t heappoi nt mentofan admi ni st r at ort oapport i on,di vi de,and award t het woest at esamongt hel awf ulhei rsoft hedecedent s. Res pondent s pr ay ed t hat t hey be appoi nt ed as spe ci al j oi nt admi ni st rat orsoft heest at e,and t oserveassuch wi t houtpost i nga bond. The RTC Cour t appoi nt ed Dal i say and Renat o asspeci al j oi nt admi ni st r at orsoft he est at e oft he deceased spouses,and r equi r ed t hem t opostabond.
CaseNo.34
Respondent s asser t ed t hei r pri ori t yi n ri ght t o be appoi nt ed as admi ni st r at orsbei ngthenextofki n ofVi cent eand Maxi ma,wher eas Dal i saywasa mer edaught er i n-l aw oft he decedent sand note ve na l egalhei rbyri ghtofr epr esent ati onf rom herl at ehusbandLeonardo.
OCAMPO V.OCAMPO
I SSUE:
CaseDi gestbyTerel yn
Whet herornott heappoi nt me ntofspeci aladmi ni st r at or sbegover ned byt her ul esr egar di ngt hesel ect i onofr egul aradmi ni st r at or s.
FACTS:
Peti t i onersar et hesurvi vi ngwi f eandt hechi l drenofLeonardoOcampo who di ed on Januar y 23, 2004.Leonar do and hi s si bl i ngs, r espondent s Renat o and Er l i ndaOcampo ar et he l egi t i mat e chi l dre n and onl yhei r soft hespousesVi ce nt eandMaxi maOcampo,who di ed i nt e s t a t e .
HELD:
A speci aladmi ni st r at ori san officeroft hecour twhoi ssubj ectt oi t s supervi si on and cont rol ,e xpect ed t oworkf orthe besti nt er estoft he enti r e est at e,wi t h a vi ew t oi t s smoot h admi ni st r at i on and speedy set t l ement. When appoi nt ed,heorshei snotr egar ded asan agentor represent ati veoft hepart i essuggesti ngt heappoi nt ment . Thepri nci pal obj ectoft heappoi nt mentofat emporaryadmi ni st rat ori st opres erve t heest ateunt i li tcan passtot hehandsofapersonf ul l yaut hori zedto admi ni st eri tf ort hebenefitofcredi t orsandhei rs,pursuantt oSect i on 2ofRul e80oft heRul esofCourt .
On June 24,2004,the peti t i oner si ni t i at eda peti t i on f or i nt est ate proc eedi ngsoft hees t at eofSps.Vi cent eOcampoandMaxi maMer cado Ocampo,and Leonar doM.Ocampo.I tal l ege dthat ,upon t hedeat h of Vi cent eand Maxi ma,r espondent sand t hei rbr ot herLeonar do j oi nt l y cont r ol l ed, managed, and admi ni st er ed t he es t at e of t hei r parent .Howev er ,when Leonar do di ed,r espondent st ook posses si on, cont r ol and management of t he pr oper t i es t o t he ex cl usi on of pet i t i oner s.The peti t i on prayed f or t he set t l ement ofthe est at e of
Whi l et heRTC consi der edt hatr espondent swer et henear estofki nt o 44
t hei r dece ase d par ent s i n t hei r appoi nt ment as j oi nt spec i al admi ni st r at or s, t hi s i s not a mandat or y r equi r ement f or t he appoi nt ment .I thasl ongbeen set t l ed t hatt hesel ect i on orremovalof speci aladmi ni st r at orsi s notgover ned by t he rul es r egar di ng t he sel ect i on orremovalofr egul aradmi ni st rat ors. Theprobatecourtmay appoi ntorr emovespeci aladmi ni st r at orsbasedongr oundsot hert han t hoseenumer ate di nt heRul esati t sdi scr et i on,sucht hatt heneedt o firstpassupon and r esol vet hei ssuesoffitnessorunfitnessand t he appl i cati on oft heor derofpr ef ere nceunderSect i on 6 ofRul e78,as woul d be pr oper i n t he case of a r egul ar admi ni st r at or ,do not obt ai n.Asl ongast hedi scret i on i sexerci sedwi t houtgraveabuse,and i sbasedon reason,equi t y,j ust i ce,andl egalpri nci pl es,i nt erf erenceby hi ghercourt si sunwarr ant ed.Theappoi nt mentorr emoval ofspeci al admi ni st rat ors,bei ngdi scr et i onary,i st husi nt er l ocut oryand maybe assai l ed t hrough apet i t i on f orc underRul e65 oft heRul esof er t i or ar i
admi ni st rat or .They praye dt hatthei rat t orneyi nf act,Romual do D. Li m beappoi nt edast hespeci aladmi ni st rat or . Pet i t i oners cont endt hat t hey shoul d be gi ve n pri or i t y i n t he admi ni st rat i on ofthe est at e si nce t hey are al l egedl yt he l egi t i mat e hei rsoft hel at eGerar do,asopposed t opri vat erespondent s,whoar e purport edl y Gerar dos i l l egi t i mat e chi l dr en.Pet i t i oners re l y on t he doctr i net hatgeneral l y,i ti st henearestofki n,whosei nt eresti smore preponderant ,who i spr ef err ed i nt hechoi ceofadmi ni st rat oroft he decedent sest at e.Theyal socl ai mt hatt heyaremorecompet entt han pri vat er espondent s or t hei rat t orneyi nf actto admi ni st erGer ardos est ate.Pet i t i onerscl ai mt ohavel i ved f ora l ongt i meand cont i nueto r es i de on Ger ar dos es t at e, whi l e r es pondent s ar e not ev en i n t hePhi l i ppi nes,havi ngl ongest abl i shedresi denceabroad. I SSUE:
Cour t .
Whet herornott heor derofpr ef er encei nt heappoi nt me ntofar egul ar admi ni st rat orappl yt ot hesel ect i on ofaspeci aladmi ni st rat or . CaseNo.35 HELD: TAN VS.GEDORI O
TheCour thasconsi st ent l yr ul ed t hatt heor derofpr ef er encei nt he appoi nt mentofaregul aradmi ni st r at oras provi ded i nt he Rul esof Courtdoesnotappl yt ot hesel ect i on ofaspeci aladmi ni st rat or .The pref er enceunderSect i on 6,Rul e78oft heRul esofCourtf ort henext ofki nr ef erst ot heappoi nt mentofar egul aradmi ni st rat or ,andnotof aspeci aladmi ni st rator,ast heappoi nt mentofthel att erl i esent i rel yi n t hedi scret i on oft hecourt ,andi snotappeal abl e.
FACTS:
Ger ar do Tan di ed on14 Oct ober 2000, l eav i ng no wi l l .Pri vat e res pondent s,whoarecl ai mi ngt obet hechi l dr en ofGerar doTan,fil ed wi t h t he RTC a pet i t i on f or t he i ssuance of l et t er s of admi ni st rat i on.Pet i t i oners,cl ai mi ngt obel egi t i matehei rsofGerardo Tan,fil edanopposi t i ont ot hepet i t i on.
Furt her more ,pet i t i oner s wer e notabl et o suffici entl y subst ant i at e t hei rcl ai m t hatt hei rcopet i t i onerVi l ma woul d havebeen t he mor e compet entandcapabl echoi cet oserveast hespeci aladmi ni st rat ri xof Gerardosest ate.
Pri vat er espondent st hen move df or t he appoi ntment of a speci al admi ni st rat or ,assert i ng t he need f ora speci aladmi ni st rat ort ot ake posses si on and char geofGer ardos est at e unt i lt he Pet i t i on can be r es ol ve d by t he RTC or unt i lt he appoi nt ment of a r eg ul ar 45
TheCour tfind i ti mmat er i alt hef actt hatpr i vat er espondent sr esi de abr oad,f orthesamecannotbesai d asr egardst hei ratt orneyi nf act , Romual do, who i s,af t er al l ,t he per son appoi nt ed by t he RTC as speci aladmi ni st rat or .I ti s undi sput ed t hatRomual do r esi des i nt he count ryandcan,t hus,personal l yadmi ni st erGerar dosest at e.
suspended upon t he deat h ofCar l os Gur r ea,and pr ayi ng t hatt he Speci alAdmi ni st r at orbe or dered t o cont i nue payi ng i tpendi ng t he finaldet ermi nati onoft hecase.
Thepr i nci palobj ectoft heappoi nt me ntofat empor ar yadmi ni st r at or i stopr eservet heest at eunt i li tcan passi nt ot hehands ofapers on f ul l yaut hori zedt oadmi ni st eri tf ort hebenefitofcredi t orsandhei rs.
Whet herornott heest at eoft hedeceased shoul d st i l lbemadel i abl e f ort hesupportduet oMr s.Gurr ea?
I SSUE:
HELD: CaseNo.36
Duet otheabsenceofproofasregardst hest at us,natureorcharact er oft he propert y now underthe cust ody oft heSpeci alAdmi ni st r at or . Preci sel y,however ,on accountofsuch l ack ofprooft her eon,weare bound by l awt o assumet hatt he est at e oft he deceased consi st s of propert y bel ongi ng t ot he conj ugalpart ner shi p,onehal fofwhi ch bel ongs pr esumpt i vel yt o Mr s.Gur r ea, asi de f r om such par toft he shar eoft hedeceasedi nsai dpart ner shi pasmaybel ongt oherasone oft hecompul soryhei rs, i fhi sal l eged wi l lwerenotal l owedt oprobat e, or ,even i fprobated,i ft he provi si on t herei n di si nheri t i ng herwere nul l i fie d.
PI JUAN VS. VDA.DE GURREA FACTS:
I n 1932,appel l antManuel a Rui zand Car l osGurr eawer emarr i ed i n Spai n,wher etheyl i ve dt oge t herunt i l1945,when heabandoned her and came,wi t ht hei rson Teodoro,t ot he Phi l i ppi nes.Her e he l i ved mari t al l y wi t h Ri zal i na Per ezby whom hehad t wo chi l dre n.Havi ng been i nf or me d by herson Teodor o,year sl at er ,t hathi sf at herwas r esi di ng i n Pont ev edr a, Negr os Occi dent al , Manuel a came t ot he Phi l i ppi nesi nJune1960.
I ti snexturge dbyMrs.Gurr ea,aswi dow oft hedeceased,shecl ai msa ri ghtofpr ef ere nceunderSect i on 6 ofRul e78 oft heRevi sed Rul esof Court .I nt hel anguage oft hi sprovi si on,sai d pref erenceexi st s" i fno exe cut or i s named i n t he wi l l or t he exe cut or or exe cut or s ar e i ncompet ent ,r ef use t he t rust,orf ai lt o gi vebond,ora person di es i nt est at e. "Noneoft hesecondi t i onsobt ai ns.ThedeceasedGurr eahas l ef tadocumentpurport i ng t o behi swi l l ,seemi ngl y,i ssti l lpendi ng probat e.So,i tcannotbesai d,asyet ,t hathehasdi edi nt est ate.Agai n, sai ddocumentnamesMarc el oPi j uan asexecut ort her eof ,andi ti snot cl ai medthathei si ncompet entt her ef or .Whati smore,hehasnotonl y notref used t het rust,but ,has,al so,expressl yaccept edi t ,byappl yi ng f orhi sappoi nt mentasexecut or ,and,uponhi sappoi nt mentasspeci al admi ni st rat or ,hasassumedthedut i est her eof .I tmaynotbeami sst o
Carl osGurr eadi edonl eavi ngadocumentpurport i ngt obehi sl astwi l l andt est ament ,i n whi chhenamedMar cel oPi j uan asexec ut ort here of and di si nheri t edMrs.Gurr eaandt hei rson,Teodoro.Soon t her eaf t er , Pi j uan i nst i t ut ed Speci alProceedi ngswi t ht heCFI ,f orthe probat eof sai d wi l l .Ther eaf t erPi j uan was,upon hi sexpar i on,appoi nt ed t emot speci aladmi ni st rat oroft heest at e,wi t houtbond.Opposi t i onst ot he pr obat e of t he wi l l wer e fil ed by Mr s.Gurr ea, her son and an i l l egi t i matedaught er On Jul y 16, 1962, Mr s.Gurr ea fil ed a mot i on al l eg i ng t hat t he af ore menti oned al i mon y,endent 000 a mont h,had bee n p el i t e,ofP1, 46
not et hatt hepr ef er enceaccorded by t heaf orement i oned provi si on of t heRul esofCourtt othe survi vi ngspouseref er st othe appoi ntofa r egul ar admi ni st r at or or admi ni st r at ri x, not to t hat of a speci al admi ni st rat or,and t hatt heorderappoi nt i ngthel att erl i eswi t hi nt he di scret i onoft heprobat ecourt ,andi snotappeal abl e.
t i t i one r ’ s HELD:Under Sect i on 3,Rul e82 oft heRul esofCour t ,pe l awf ulactsbef orethe revocati on ofherl et t ersofadmi ni st rat i on or bef or eherr emovalshal lhavet hesameval i di t yasi ft her ewasnosuch revocati on orr emoval .I ti sel ement arythatt heeffectofrevocati on of l et t erst est ament aryorofadmi ni st rat i on i stot ermi natet heaut hori t y of t he execut or or admi ni st r at or , but t he act s of t he exec ut or or admi ni st rat or ,donei n goodf ai t h pri ortotherevocati on oft hel et t ers, wi l lbepr ot ect ed,and a si mi l arpr ot ect i on wi l lbeext ended t or i ght s acqui re dunderapre vi ousgrantofadmi ni st rat i on.
Cas eDi gesdbyOSHI N
#40-Vda.DeBacl i ngvs.Laguna
#41 -Rui zvs.CA ( 1996) FACTS: Pri vat erespondentHect orLagudai st heregi st eredownerofa
r esi dent i all and wher epet i t i onerand herl at ehusband,Dr .Ramon Bacal i ng,const ructed a re si dent i alhouse. Unabl et o pay t he l ease rental ,an act i on f orej ect mentwasfil edbypri vat erespondentagai nst pet i t i oneri n hercapaci t yasj udi ci aladmi nst ratr i xoft heestateofDr . Bacal i ng.Thepet i t i onerent er edi nt oacompr omi seagr eementon Jul y 29,1964 wi t h pri vat eres pondentLaguda. Forf ai l uret osati sf yt he condi t i onsoft heset t l ement ,Laguda moved f orexecut i on. Pet i t i oner movedf orr econsi derati on t owhi chLagudafil edan opposi t i on al l egi ng t hatas j udi ci aladmi ni st rat ri x as ofJul y 29,1964,she was l egal l y aut hori zedt oente ri nt ot heami cabl eset t l ementwhi ch wast hebasi s oft hedeci si on dat ed Jul y30,1964,oft heCi t yCourtofI l oi l osought t obeexecute d and,t her ef or e,heractwasbi ndi ngupon t hepr esent j udi ci aladmi ni st r at or ,At t y .Rober t o Di ner os,who r epl aced pet i t i oner uponherdi sc harg eassuchonNov ember28,1964.
I SSUE:
Hi l ari oRui zl ef tahol ographi cwi l lwhere i n henamed ashi s FACTS: hei rshi sonl yson,hi sadopti vedaught erand hi sgrandchi l dren f rom hi sonl yson.Hi sonl yson wasal sonamedexecut oroft hewi l l .Upon hi sdeath,t heonl ysondi dnotpeti t i on f ortheprobat eofsai dwi l l ,and eve n opposed t hepr obat eoft hewi l l .Thepr obat ecourtorder ed t hat supportbe gi ven t ot hegrandchi l dre n,and t hatt heti t l estot hetwo apart ment sbei ngrentedoutber el easedt othehei rs.
HELD A : st herul esofcourtprovi desthat ot hesuppo r tt obegi v en,t
ONLYCHI LDREN oft hedecease d( aswel last hesurvi vi ngspouse)ar e ent i t l ed t o support ,notthe grandchi l dr en . st A ot he r e l e as eo ft he , c o u r t h e l d t h a t i t w a s t o o e a r l y t o r e l e a s e t h e t i t l e s y e t a s t he t i t l e s est at ehasnoty etbeen i nvent ori ed and apprai sed,t hecharge supon t heest atehasnotye tbeen pai d,and t herei sst i l lan i ssueastot he i nt ri nsi c val i di t y of t he wi l l whi ch t he court shoul d proceed t o
Whet her or not t he act s of t he pet i t i oner as j udi ci al
admi ni st rat ri xpri ort oherdi schar georr emovalar eval i dandbi ndi ng upon hers ucce ssor .
det ermi nefirst .Fi nal l y,courthel dt hatt heri ghtofan executoror admi ni st r atort ot heposses si onand managementoft her ealand 47
wer enecessar yf ort hepr eser vat i onanduseoft hef ami l yr esi dence.As a r esul t of t hose expenses, t he coowner s, i ncl udi ng t he t hr ee opposi t or s, woul d be abl et o use t he f ami l y home i n comf or t , conveni enceandsecuri t y.Wehol dt hatt heprobatecourtdi dnoterri n appr ovi ngtheuseoft hei ncomeoft heest at et odef rayt hoseexpenses.
andcan onl y per sonalpr oper t i esoft hedeceased i snotabsol ut e beexer ci sed“ sol ongasi ti snecessar yoft hepayme ntoft hedebt sand expensesofadmi ni st rat i on.
#42-DeGuzmanvs.DeGuzmanCar i l l o
CaseDi ges tbyARNEL
FACTS: Thi scasei saboutt hepr opr i et yofal l owi ngasadmi ni st r at i on
G. R.No.74769 Sept ember28,1990
expenses cer t ai n di sbur sement s made by t he admi ni st r at or of t he t est at eest at eoft hel at eFel i x J.deGuzman ofGapan,NuevaEci j a. One oft he propert i es l ef tby t he decedentwas a r esi dent i alhouse l ocatedi nt hepobl aci on whi ch wasadj udi cat ed t ohi sei ghtc hi l dr en, each onebei nggi vena1/8 proi ndi vi sosharei nt heproj ectofparti t i on. The admi ni st r at or submi t t ed f our account i ng r epor t s f or hi s di sburs ementswhi chwer eobj ect edbyt het hr eehei r s.
#43BEATRI ZF.GONZALES,pe t i t i one r ,
vs. HON.ZOI LO AGUI NALDO,JudgeofRegi onalTr i alCourt ,Br anch 143,Makat i ,Met r oMani l aandTERESA F.OLBES,respondents.
HELD: Anexecut ororadmi ni st r at ori sal l owedt henecessaryexpenses
FACTS:
i nt hecare,management ,andset t l ementoft heest ate.Hei sent i t l edt o posses sandmanaget hedecedent’ sr ealandpersonalest at easl ongas i ti s necess ary f or t he payment of t he debt s and t he expenses of admi ni st r at i on.He i s account abl ef or t he whol e decedent ’ s est at e whi ch hascomei nt ohi spossessi on,wi t h al lt hei nt er est ,pr ofit ,and i ncomet her eof ,andwi t ht hepr oceedsofsomuchofsuchest at easi s sol dbyhi m,att hepri ceatwhi chi twassol d( Sec.3,Rul e84;Secs.1 and7,Rul e85,Rul esofCourt ) .
•
Speci al Proceedi ngs No. 021 i s an i nt est ate proceedi ng i nvol vi ng t he es t at eoft he decease d Doña RamonaGonzal s.Doña e sVda.deFavi Ramona i ssurvi vedbyherf our( 4)chi l dren whoar eheronl yhei r s, namel y,Aster i oFavi s,Beatr F.Gonzal es , er F.Ol bes,andCeci l i a i z T esa Favi sGomez .
The cour ta quoappoi nt ed peti t i onerBeatr i z F.Gonzal es and pri vat e •
r espondentTer esaOl besascoadmi ni st rat i cesoftheestat e.
I t shoul d be not ed t hat t he f ami l yr esi dence was part i t i oned proi ndi vi soamongt hedecedent ’ sei ghtchi l dren.Each oneoft hem was gi ven a oneei ghtsharei n conf ormi t ywi t ht hetest ator’ swi l l .Fi veof t heei ghtcoowner sconsent edt otheuseoft hef undsoft heest at ef or r epai r and i mprove ment oft he f ami l y home.I ti s obvi ous that t he expensesi nquest i on wer ei ncurr edt opr eser vet hef ami l yhomeandt o mai nt ai nt he f ami l y’ s soci alst andi ng i nt he communi t y.Obvi ousl y, t hoseexpensesre dounded t ot he benefitofal lt he coowners .They
i z was i Whi l e pet i t i onerBeatr nt he Uni t ed St at es acc ompanyi ng her •
ai l i nghusband whowasrec ei vi ngmedi calt r eat menti nt hatc ount ry Ter esafil i zascoadmi ni str atri x,on t eda mot i on t ore moveBeatr he
t hatshei ground si nc a pab l eoru ns ui t abl et odi s c h ar g et het r us tand h ad c o mmi t t e da c t s an do mi s s i o ns de t r i me nt alt ot h ei n t e r e s to ft he e s t at eandt hehe i r s. 48
•
I n an Or der ,r es pondentJudgecancel thel et t ersofadmi ni st rati on l ed
I n t he appoi ntment of the admi ni st r at or of the es t at e of a
gr ant ed t o Beatr he admi ni st rat ri x oft he i z and ret ai nedTeresa as t
he pri nci palconsi derat i on r eckoned wi t hi st he deceased person,t
est at eoft hel at eRamonaGonzal es.
i nt eresti nsai dest ateoft heonet obeappoi nt edasadmi ni st rat or .The under l yi ngassumpti on behi ndthi sr ul e i sthatt hosewhowi l lre ap
t hebenefitofawi se,speedy,economi caladmi ni st rat i on oft heestat e, or ,on t heot herhand,s uffert heconsequencesofwast e,i mprovi dence or mi smanagement ,have t he hi ghest i nt er es t and mosti nfluent i al
I SSUE:
moti vet oadmi ni st ert heestat ecorrectl y.
Whet herornott her emo valofBeat r i zascoadmi ni st r at i xoft heest at ei s •
val i d.
Admi ni st r at or s have such an i nt er est i nt he execut i on oft hei r
t hout j ust t r ust as enti t l et hem t o prot ect i on f r om r emovalwi cause.Hence,Sect i on 2ofRul e82 oft heRul esofCourtprovi dest he l eg al and spec i fic causes aut hori z i ng t he cour tt o r emov e an admi ni st rator .
RULI NG: •
No.RemovalofBeatr i zasco-admi ni st rat i xoft heest at ei snotamongthe
Whi l ei ti sconcededt hatt hecour ti si nvest edwi t hampl edi scr et i oni n t her emovalofan admi ni st rat or ,i th o we v e rmu s th av es omef a c tl e g al l y
groundf orr emovalofadmi ni st rat or .
T e mustbe evi dence ofan . her be f o r ei ti no r d ert oj us t i f ya r e mo v al
Ther ul ei st hati fnoexecut ori snamed i nt hewi l l ,ort henamed
actoromi ss i on on t he partoft headmi ni st r at ornotconf ormabl e
executororexecutorsar ei ncompetent,ref usethe tr ust ,orf ai lt o
t o ori n di sr egardoft herul esort heor dersoft hecourt ,whi ch i t
he courtmustappoi ntan gi ve bond,ora person di esi nt est ate,t
dee ms suffici ent or subst ant i al t o war r ant t he r emov al of t he admi ni st r at or .I n maki ng such a det er mi nat i on, t he cour t must exer ci segoodj udgment ,gui dedbyl aw andprece dent s.
admi ni st r at or of t he es t at e of t he dece ase dwho shal l act as r epres entat i venotonl y oft he courtappoi nt i ng hi m butal so oft he hei rsand thecredi t orsofthe estat e.I nt heexerci seofi t sdi scret i on, t hepr obat ecourtmayappoi ntone,t woormor ecoadmi ni st r at orst o havet hebenefitoft hei rj udgmentand per haps atal lt i mest o have di fferenti nt erest sr epresent ed.
di dnotbas etheremovaloft he I nt hepre sentcase,thecourtaquo peti t i onerascoadmi ni st rat ri x on any oft hecausesspeci fied i n
Thecourtbasedthe respondent' smoti on f orrel i efofthepeti ti oner. removaloft hepet i t i oneron t hef actt hati nt headmi ni st rat i on oft he es t at e, confli ct s and mi sunder st andi ngs have ex i st ed bet wee n pet i t i oner and r es pondent Te r es a Ol bes whi ch al l eg edl y have prej udi cedt heest at e,andt headdedci r cumst ancet hatpet i t i onerhad beenabsentf r om t hecount r y .
49
I nstanceofDavao l osV.Mat uteand Mat i as agai nstre spondent s,Car
Cas eNo44
S.Matute,asdef endants ,i n thei rcapaci ti esascoadmi ni st rat ors G. R.No.L29407Jul y29,1983
of t he es t at e of AmadeoMat uteOl ave l ecti on of an ,f or the col al l egedi ndebtedness ofP19, 952. 11.Def endant sCarl osV.Mat ut eand
ESTATE OF AMADEO MATUTE OLAVE,asr epr es ent edbyJOSE S.
Mat i asS.Mat ut ei n sai dCi vi lCaseNo.4623,fil edan answerdenyi ng t hei rl ack ofknowl edgeand quest i oni ng t he l egal i t y oft he cl ai m of SAMCO.
MATUTE,Judi ci alCoAdmi ni st r at ori n Sp.Proc.No.25876,Cour t of
Fi r st
I nst ance
of
Mani l a,pe t i t i one r ,
vs. An w t t ed t oCourtofFi Ami cabl e Set t l emen t assubmi rs tI nst ance of
HONORABLE MANASES G.REYES,Pres i di ng Judge ofBranch I I I ,
•
Court of Fi r st I nst ance of Davao, Davao Ci t y; SOUTHWEST
Davao,wher ebythepr opert yoft heest at ecover edbyOCTNo.0-27of
AGRI CULTURAL MARKETI NG CORPORATI ON al so known as
Dav ao wasconveyed and ceded t oSAMCO aspaymentofi t scl ai m.
( SAMCO) ;CARLOS V.MATUTE,as anot her Admi ni st r at or oft he
wa Thesai d Ami cabl eSet t l eme ntsi gned by t heher ei nr espondent s s
Est at e ofAmadeoMat uteOl ave,Sp.Proc.No.25876 CFI,Mani l a;
nots ubmi t t edt oandappr oved bythet hen Cour tofFi r stI nst ance
and MATI ASS.MATUTE,asf ormerCoAdmi ni st r at oroft heEst at e
ofMani l a,Br anch I V,i n Sp.Proc.No.25876,nornot i ce t hereof
of
. made t ot he benefici ar i esand hei r si n sai d speci alproceedi ngs
AmadeoMat ut eOl ave,
Sp.
Pr oc.
No.
25876,
CFI ,
Despi t etheut t erl ack ofapprovaloft hepr obat ecourti n Mani l a,t he CFIDavaoappr ove dt he sai dAmi cabl eSet t l ementand gav et hesame t heenf orceabi l i t yofacourtdeci si on.
Mani l a,respondents.
FACTS: I SSUE:
at e of AmadeoMat uteOl ave The pet i t i on al l eged t hat t he est i st he •
owneri nf eesi mpl eofaparcelofl and cont ai ni ngan areaof293, 578 squaremet ers ,si t uat edprovi nceofDavao.
Whet herornott heAmi cabl eSet t l eme ntappr ovedbyt heCFIDavao,not t heprobatecourt ,i sval i d.
rs tI nst anceofMani l a,asthe probat ecourt TheCourtofFi ,i ssued •
an orderdi rect i ngthecoadmi ni st rat ors,Car l osV.Mat uteand Mat i as t osecuret heprobat ecourt ' sapprovalbef oreent eri ngi nt o S.Mat ute, any t ransacti on i nvol vi ng t he sevent een ( 17)t i t l es oft he est ate,of 27 whi cht hepr oper t ydescr i bedi nOCTNo.0i soneoft hem. •
RULI NG:
Pri vat er espondent Southwest Agri cul t ural Mar keti ng Corporat i on
•
( SAMCO)fil edCi vi lCaseNo.4623wi t ht he r espondentCourtofFi r st 50
No.The Ami cabl e Set t l ementnotappro ve d by t he Pr obat e Cour ti s
i nv al i d.
nSp.Proc.No.25876,whi chhast he ofthepr obat ecourtofMani l a,i excl usi vej uri sdi ct i on overt heest at eofAmadeoMatut eOl ave.I twasa
Secti on 1,Rul e87 oft heRul esofCour t ,provi desthat" noacti on
mi st akeon t hepartofr espondentcour tt ohavegi ven duecour se
upon a cl ai m f or t he r ec ov er y of money or debt or i nt er es t
essi ssuet hequest i onedOrder ,dat ed t o Ci vi lCaseNo.4623,much l
t her eon shal l be commence d
November10,1967,approvi ngt heAmi cabl eSet t l ement.
agai nst t he exe cut or or
"Thecl ai m ofpri vat er espondentSAMCO bei ngone admi ni s t r at o r ;. . . ari si ngf r om acont r actmaybepur suedonl ybyfil i ngt hesamei nt he admi ni st rat i on proceedi ngs i nt heCourtofFi rs tI nst anceofMani l a ( Sp.Proc.No.25876)f ortheset t l ementoft heest at eoft hedeceased AmadeoMat ut eOl ave;and t he cl ai m mustbe fil ed wi t hi nt he per i od prescr i bed, ot herwi se, t he same shal l be deemed " barr ed f ore ver . " ( Sect i on 5,Rul e86,Rul esofCourt ) .
CaseNo.45 G. R.No.L18936
May23,1967
I NTESTATEESTATE OFENCARNACI ON ELCHI CO Vda.de FERNANDO,deceas ed.
poseofpr esentat i on ofcl ai msagai nstdecedent soft he The pur
NATI VI DAD E.I GNACIO andLEONOR E.
est atei n the probatecourti sto prot ectthe est ateofdeceased persons.That way ,t he execut or or admi ni st r at or wi l l be abl et o
admi ni st ratr i ces-appel l ant s, ALMAZAN,
exami ne each cl ai m and det er mi newhet heri ti sa properonewhi ch shoul dbeal l owed.
vs. PAMPANGABUSCOMPANY,I NC. , cl ai mantappel l ee.
Thepri i st o mary obj ectoft he provi si onsrequi ri ng presentati on appri setheadmi ni st rat orandt hepr obat ecourtoft heexi st enceoft he cl ai m sot hatapr operand t i mel yarr angementmaybe made f ori t s payment i nf ul l or by pror at a port i on i nt he due course of t he admi ni st r at i on,i nasmuch asupon t hedeat h ofa person,hi sent i r e est at ei sbur denedwi t ht hepaymentofal lofhi sdebtsandnocredi t or shal lenj oyanypref erence orpri ori t y;al loft hem shag shareprorat a i nthel i qui dati on oft heestat eoft hedeceased.
( Pambusco)l odgedi t s ,I nc. Augus t29,1951.PampangaBusCompany
I ti scl eart hatt hemai n pur poseofpri vat eres pondentSAMCO i n
naci onEl chi coVda.deFernandodi ed.Byt Januar y23,1955.Encar hi s
fil i ngCi vi lCaseNo.4623 i nt hethen Cour tofFi r stI nst anceof
t i me,Pambuscoi nt hef oregoi ngci vi lcase had al r eadypr esent ed i t s evi denceandsubmi t t edi t scase.
FACTS: •
compl ai nti nt heCour agai nstt tofFi rs tI nst ance ofMani l a wo( 2) def endant s Val ent i n Fer nando and Encar naci onEl chi coVda. de
Fernandof orcol l ect i onofP105, 000. 00 uponacont ract ualobl i gati on. •
o se cur e a money j udgment agai nst t he es t at e whi ch Davao was t ev ent ual l yended i nt he conve yancet o SAMCO ofmor et han t went yni ne ( 29)hect aresofl and bel ongi ng t ot he est at e oft he deceased
•
nt est ateproceedi ngs werefil ed.Not i cetotheestat e' s Mar c h23,1955.I cr edi t orswasgi ven f ort hem t ofil ethei rcl ai mswi t hi n si x( 6)mont hs
AmadeoMat ut eOl avei npayme ntofi t scl ai m,wi thoutpri orauthori ty 51
f rom t hi sdate,t hefirstpubl i cat i on oft henoti ce.
money,debt or i nter est t her eon,and t he def endant di es bef ore finalj udgmenti n theCourtofFi rs tI nst ance,i tshal lbedi smi ssed
•
t ert ri alon t hemeri t s,t heCourtofFi rstI nst ance Dec ember11,1958.Af
t obepr osecut edi nt hemannerespeci al l ypr ovi ded i nt heserul es.
i ng t he of Mani l a r ender ed j udgment i n t he ci vi l case , order
he sum ofP93, 000. 00 t oge t her def endant s to pay the Pambusco t
l osophy behi nd t herul ewhi ch provi desf ort hedi smi ssalof ThePhi •
wi t ht hecost soft hesepr oceedi ngs. •
the ci vilcase lmoneycl ai ms i sthat ,upont hedeathofdef endant ,al shoul d be fil ed i nt he t est at e ori nt ers t atepr oceedi ngs"t o avoi d
I n Speci alProceedi ng25256,I nt est ateEst ateof February25,1959.
o Encarnaci onEl chi coVda. Fernando, Pambusc
r eg i st er ed
7 " Obvi ousl y,t he l egalpr ecept j ust usel ess dupl i ci t y ofprocedur e.
i t s
quot ed i spr ocedurali n nat ur e.I toutl i nesthe met hod by whi ch an act i on f orr ecoveryofmoney,debtori nt er estmaycont i nue,upon t he t ermstherei n prescri bed.Whet hert heori gi nalsui tf ort herecoveryof money— asher e— proceedst oi t sconcl usi on,ori sdi smi ssedandthe cl ai m coveredtherebyfil edwi t ht heprobat ecourt ,onet hi ngi scert ai n: nosubst ant i alr i ght soft hepart i esareprej udi ced.
cont i ngentcl ai m i nt hesespeci alproceedi ngs— f orwhat eve rmoney j udgme ntma yber ender edi nhi sf avori nt heci vi lsui t . T udgment i nt he ci vi lcase havi ng r eached . he j Januar y25,1961 •
final i ty,t heprobatec ourti ssued an or derwhi chal l owedsai damount
of P46, 500. 00 t o be pai d by t he hei r s and/or t he j oi nt admi ni st rat ri ces,butnopaymentt here ofshal lbemadeunt i laf t ert he admi ni st rat ri cesshal lhavei nf ormed t heCourti n wri t i ngastot he exi st enceofot herunset t l edmoneycl ai msagai nstt heest at eandoft he suffici encyoft heassetsavai l abl ef orpaymentofal lt hedebt s.
•
However ,att het i meoft hedeat h ofdef endantEncarnaci onEl chi coVda.
de Fernando,pl ai nt i ff Pambuscohad al r eady cl osedi t sevi denceand submi t t ed i t s cas e. Her admi ni st r at or subst i t ut ed. By t hi s subst i t ut i on,t he est at e had noti ce of t he cl ai m.The est at e was t husrepresented. Theadmi t ook acti ve st eps ni st rat oroft heest ate toprot ectthe i nter estsoft he estat e.Hewentt ot ri al .Def eatedi n
t heCourtofFi r stI nst ance,heappeal ed t ot heCourtofAppeal s.He
I SSUE:
even el evated t hatci vi lcase t ot hi sCourt .Now t hatt he j udgment has become final ,t he est at e cannot be heard to say t hat sai d
Whet herornotPambuso’ scl ai m f orpayme ntofi ndebt nesspr oper l y admi t t edbyProbateCourt .
j udgment— r eached af t era f ul ldr esst r i alon t he mer i t s— wi l l
.Theest at ehast hus now go f or naught wai ved i t sr i ghtt o have Pambusco' s cl ai m re-l i t i gat ed i nt heest ateproceedi ngs.For ,t hough
present mentofprobat ecl ai msi si mperat i ve,i ti sgeneral l yunderst ood RULI NG:
wa veri st o t hati tmaybewai vedb And , i yt hee s t at e ' sr e pr e s ent at i v e. be
Yes.I twaspr oper l yadmi t t edbyt hepr obat ecour t . •
•
det er mi ned
f r om
t he
admi ni st r at or ' s
" act s
and
Cert ai nl y,t headmi ni st rat or' sf ai l uretopl ead t hest atut eof conduct . " noncl ai ms,hi sacti vepart i ci pati on,and resi st ancet opl ai nt i ff' scl ai m,
Sect i on 21,Rul e 3 oft he Rul es ofCourt ,provi des: SEC.21.Wher e
osuchwai ver . i nt heci v i ls ui t ,amountt
.— When t he act i on i sf or r ecover y of cl ai m does not surv i ve 52
reconvenedt oconsi derhi scl ai ms,pl ai nt i ffstat esthathi sf ai l uret o presentt hesai dcl ai mst othecommi t t eewasduet ohi sbel i eft hati t wasunnecessar yt odosobecauseoft hef actt hatt het est at or ,i nhi s wi l l ,expr essl yr ecogni z edt hem anddi r ect edt hatt heyshoul dbepai d. Thei nf er encei st hathadpl ai nt i ff' scl ai msnotbeenme nt i onedi nt he wi l lhewoul dhavepr esent edt ot hecommi t t eeasamat t erofcour se; t hatpl ai nt i ffwashel dtobel i evebythi sexpressment i on ofhi scl ai ms i nt hewi l lt hati twoul dbeunnecessaryt opr esentt hem t othe commi t t ee;andt hathedi dnotbecomeawareoft heneces si t yof prese nt i ngt hem t ot hecommi t t eeunt i laf t ert hecommi t t eehadmade i t sfinalr eport.
CaseDi ges tbyKI M V.CLAI MSAGAI NST ESTATE ( RULES86& 88) G. R.No.L8235
Mar ch19,1914
#46-I SI DRO SANTOS,pl ai nt i ffa ppe l l ant ,
vs. def endant appel l ee. LEANDRA MANARANG,admi ni st r at ri x,
I SSUE:Whenandunderwhatci r cumst ancesmayt hecommi t t eebe recal l edt oconsi derbel atedcl ai ms?
*st atut eofnoncl ai ms
HELD: FACTS: Sect i on689( provi des: c i v i lpr o c edur e ) DonLucasdeOcampodi edonNov ember18,1906,posse ss edof cert ai nrealandpersonalpropert ywhi ch,byhi sl astwi l land t est amentdatedJul y26,1906,hel ef tt ohi st hreechi l dren.Thef ourt h cl auseoft hi swi l lreadsasf ol l ows:Ial sodecl arethatIhavecont racted t hedebtsdet ai l edbel ow,andi ti smydesi ret hatt heymaybe rel i gi ousl ypai dbymywi f eandexecut orsi nt hef orm andatt het i me agree dupon wi t hmycr edi t ors .
Thatcour tshal lal l ow sucht i meast heci r cums t ancesoft hecase requi ref orthecredi t orstopresentt hei rcl ai msthecommi t t eef or exami nat i onandal l owance;butnot ,i nt hefirsti nst ance,moret han t wel vemont hs,orl esst han si xmont hs;andtheti meal l owedshal lbe st at edi nt hecommi ssi on.Thecourtmayext end t het i meas ci r cumst ancesrequi re ,butnotsothatt hewhol et i meshal lexceed ei ght eenmonths.
Amongt hedebt sme nt i onedi nt hel i str ef er r edt oar et woi nf avorof t hepl ai nt i ff,I si droSant os;onedueonApri l14,1907,f orP5, 000,and var i ousot herdescr i bedasf al l i ngdueatdi ffer entdat es( t hedat esar e notgi ven)amount i ngt ot hesum ofP2, 454.Thewi l lwasdul ypr obat ed andacommi t t eewasr egul arl yappoi nt edt ohearanddet er mi nesuch cl ai msagai nstt heest at easmi ghtbepre sent ed.Thi scommi t t ee submi t t edi t sr eportt ot hecourtonJune27,1908.
I ti ss t r i c t l yc onfine d,i ni t sappl i c at i o n,t ocl ai msag ai ns tt hee s t at eof deceasedpers ons,andhasbeenal mostuni ver sal l yadopt edaspartof t heprobat el aw oft heUni t edSt at es.I ti scommonl yt ermedt he st atuteofnoncl ai ms ,andi t spurposei st osett l etheaffai rsoft he
est at ewi t hdi spat ch,sothatr esi duemaybedel i ver edt othepers ons ent i t l edt heret owi t houtt hei rbei ngaf t erwardscal l edupon t orespond i nact i onsf orcl ai ms,whi ch,undert heordi narystatut eofl i mi t ati ons, havenotyetprescri bed.
I nhi spe t i t i o no f ul ngt hatt hecommi t t eebe J y14,1909,aski 53
Theobj ectoft hel aw i nfixi ngadefini t eper i odwi t hi nwhi chcl ai ms mustbepresent edi st oi nsuret hespeedyset t l i ngoft heaffai rsofa deceasedpersonandt heearl ydel i veryoft hepropertyoft heest atei n t hehandsoft hepersonsent i t l edt orecei vei t .( Est ateofDeDi os,24 Phi l .Rep. ,573. )
extensi onoft hi st i meundersect i on 690rest edi nt hedi scret i on oft he court .( Est ateofDeDi os,supra. )I notherwords,t hecourtcoul d extendt hi st i meandrecal lt hecommi t t eef oraconsi derat i on oft he pl ai nt i ff' scl ai msagai nstt heest ateofj ust i cerequi redi t ,atanyti me wi t hi nt hesi xmont hsaf t erJanuary23,1908,orunt i lJul y23,1908. Pl ai nt i ff' spet i t i onwasnotpresent edunt i lJul y14,1909.Thebarof t hest at ut eofnoncl ai msi s concl usi veundert heseci r cumst ancesas t hebaroft heordi naryst atut eofl i mi t ati onswoul dbe.
Duepossi bl yt othecomparati veshort nessoft heperi odofl i mi t ati on appl yi ngt osuchcl ai msascomparedwi t ht heordi naryst at ut eof l i mi t ati ons,t hestat ut eofnoncl ai mshasnott hefinal i t yoft he ordi narystat ut eofl i mi t ati ons.I tmaybesaf el ysai dthatasavi ng provi si on,moreorl essl i beral ,i sannexedt othestat ut eofnoncl ai ms i neveryj uri sdi cti on wherei sf ound.I nt hi scount ryi t ssavi ngcl ausei s f oundi nsect i on690,whi chre adsasf ol l ows:
G. R.No.88602
Onappl i cati on ofacredi t orwhohasf ai l edt opresenthi scl ai m,i f madewi t hi nsi xmont hsaf t ert heti meprevi ousl yl i mi t ed,or ,i fa commi t t eef ai l st ogi vet henot i cerequi redbythi schapt er ,andsuch appl i cati oni smadebef oret hefinalset t l ementoft heestat e,t hecourt may ,f orc auseshown,andon suchte rmsasaree qui t abl e,r enew t he commi ssi onandal l ow f urt hert i me,notexcee di ngonemont h,f ort he commi t t eet oexami nesuchcl ai m,i nwhi chcasei tshal lper sonal l y not i f yt hepart i esoft het i meandpl aceofheari ng,andassoonasmay bemaket her et ur noft hei rdoi ngst ot hecour t .
Apri l6,1990
#47-TOMASA VDA.DE JACOB,asSpeci alAdmi ni st r at r i xoft he Est at eoft heDeceasedALFREDO E.JACOB, pe t i t i one r ,
vs. HONORABLECOURTOFAPPEALS,BI COLSAVI NGS& LOAN ASSOCI ATI ON,JORGE CENTENERA,AND LORENZO C. ROSALES,respondents. FACTS:
I fthecommi t t eef ai l st ogi vet henoti cerequi red,thati sasuffici ent causef orr econveni ngi tf orf urt herconsi derat i on ofcl ai mswhi chmay nothavebeen present edbef orei t sfinalre portwassubmi t t edtot he court .But ,t hi si snott hecasemadebyt hepl ai nt i ff,asthecommi t t ee di dgi vet henot i cerequi redbyl aw.Wher et hepr opernoti cehasbeen gi vent heri ghtt ohavethecommi t t eerecal l edf ort heconsi derat i on ofa bel at edcl ai m appear st or estfir stupont hecondi t i ont hati ti s present edwi t hi nsi xmont hsaf t ert het i meprevi ousl yl i mi t edf ort he present ati on ofcl ai ms.I nt hepresentcasethet i meprevi ousl yl i mi t ed wassi xmont hsf r om Jul y23,1907.Thi sal l owedt hepl ai nt i ffunt i l January23,1908,t opr esenthi scl ai mst ot hecommi t t ee.An
Dr .Al f redoE.Jacobwasther egi st eredownerofaparcelofl andi n NagaCi t y .Somet i mei n1972Jor geCent ener awasappoi nt edas admi ni st r at orofHaci endaJacobunt i lJanuary1,1978whenthe Speci alPowerofAt t orneyexecut edi nhi sf avorbyDr .Jacobwas revokedbyt hel att er .Becauseoft heprobl em ofpayi ngreal t ytaxes, i nt ernalr evenuet axesandunpai dwagesoff arm l aborer soft he haci enda,Dr .JacobaskedCent enerat onegot i atef oral oan.Fort hi s purpose,aspeci alpowerofat t orneywasexecut edandacknowl edged byDr .Jacobbef or enot arypubl i cLor enzoRosal es. Consequent l y,Cent enerasecuredal oan i ntheamountofP18, 000. 00 54
f r om t heBi colSavi ngs& LoanAssoci at i onsomet i mei nSept ember 1972.Cente ner asi gnedandexecut edthere alest at emort gageand promi ssorynot easat t orneyi nf actofDr .Jacob.Whent hel oanf el l duei n1975Cente ner af ai l edt opayt hesamebutwasabl et oarr ange ar est ructuri ngoft hel oan usi ngthesamespeci alpowerofatt orney andpropert yassecuri t y.Agai n,Cent eneraf ai l edt opaythel oan when i tf el ldueandsohearrangedf oranotherrest ruct uri ngoft hel oan wi t ht hebankonNovember23,1976.Cent ener aagai nf ai l edt opay t hel oanupon t hemat uri t ydat ef orc i ngt hebankt osendademand l et t er .Acopyoft hedemandl et t erwassentt oDr .Jacobbutnorepl y ordeni alwasrecei vedbythebank.Thus,t hebankf orecl osedt hereal est at emort gageandt hecorrespondi ngpr ovi si onalsal eoft he mort gagedpr opert yt ot her espondentbankwaseffect ed.
agai nstt hedeceasedsecuredbymort gageorothercol l ater alsecuri t y, mayabandon t hesec ur i t yandpros ecut ecl ai mi nt hemannerpro vi ded i nt hi srul e,andsharei nthegeneraldi st ri but i on oft heassetsoft he est ate;orhemayf orecl osehi smort gageorreal i zeupon hi ssecuri t y, byact i oni ncour t ,maki ngt heexecut ororadmi ni st r at orapar t y def endant ,andi ft herei saj udgmentf oradefici ency,af t ert hesal eof t hemort gagedpremi ses,ort hepropert ypl edged,i nt hef orecl osureor ot herproceedi ngtoreal i zeupont hesecuri t y,hemaycl ai m hi s defici encyj udgmenti nthemannerprovi ded i nthepre cedi ngsect i on; orhemayrel yuponhi smort gageorothersecuri t yal one,andf orecl ose t hesameatanyti mewi t hi nt heperi odoft hest atut eofl i mi t ati ons, andi nt hateventheshal lnotbeadmi t t edasacredi t or ,andshal l recei venosharei nt hedi st ri but i on oftheot herasset softheestat e; butnot hi ngher ei ncont ai nedshal lpr ohi bi tt heexecut oror admi ni st rat orf rom re deemi ngt hepropert ymort gagedorpl edged,by payi ngthedebtf orwhi chi ti shel dassecuri t y,undert hedi rect i on of t hecourt ,i fthecourtshal ladj udgei tt obef orthebesti nt erestoft he est at et hatsuchredempt i onshal lbemade
Peti t i onerTomasaVda.DeJacobcont endst hatt heext raj udi ci al f orecl osureproceedi ngsandthesal eoft hepropert ymort gagedunder t heamendedrealest at emort gageaf t ert hemort gagordi edar enul l andvoi d.I ti spoi nt edoutt hatDr .Jacobdi edonMarc h9,1979and t hatt heext raj udi ci alf orecl osureproceedi ngswereeffect edaf t erhi s deat h,t hati s,t hepubl i cauct i onsal ewasmadeonMay11,1979. Pet i t i onerarguesthatsuchextr aj udi ci alf orecl osurecan onl ybe prosecut edduri ngt hel i f et i meofDr .Jacobf ort her eason t hatsuch ki ndoff orecl osureunderActNo.3135,asamended,i saut hori zedonl y becauseoft hespeci alpowerofat t or neyi nser t edi nt hemor t gagedeed; andthatsai dspeci alpowerofat t orneycannotext endbeyondthe l i f et i meoft hesupposedmort gagor .
From t hef oregoi ngprovi si on oft heRul esi ti scl earl yrecogni zedt hata mort gageehasthreer emedi est hatmaybeal t ernat el yavai l edofi n casethemort gagordi es,t owi t : ( 1)t owai vet hemort gageandcl ai mt heent i redebtf rom t heest ateof t hemort gagorasanor di narycl ai m; ( 2)t of orecl osethemort gagej udi ci al l yandprovet hedefici encyasan ordi narycl ai m;and;
I SSUE w : het herornotanext r aj udi ci alf or ecl osur eofamor t gagema y pr oceedevenaf t ert hedeat hoft hemort gagor .
( 3)t orel yont hemortgageexclusi vel y,orothersecuri t yandf orecl ose t hesameatanyti me,bef orei ti sbarredbyprescri pti on,wi t houtt he ri ghtt ofil eacl ai mf oranydefici ency.
HELD:YES. Sect i on 7,Rul e86 oft heRul esofCourtprovi desasf ol l ows:
From t hef oregoi ngi ti scl earthatt hemort gageedoesnotl osei t sl i ght t oext raj udi ci al l yf orecl oset hemortgageevenaft ert hedeat hofthe
Sec.7.Mor edi t orhol di ngacl ai m t g ag ede b tduef r o me s t at e.— Acr 55
mort gagorasathi rdal t ernat i veunderSect i on7,Rul e86oft heRul es ofCourt .
Li l i a subsequentl ymoved f ort heappoi nt mentofan I nt er i m Speci al Admi ni st r at oroft heest at eofherl at emo t her .
Thepowert of or ecl oseamor t gagei snotanor di nar yagencyt hat cont empl atedexcl usi vel ytherepresent ati on oft hepri nci palbyt he agentbuti spri mari l yanaut hori t yconf err edupont hemort gageef or t hel att er' sownprot ect i on.Thatpowersurvi vesthedeathoft he mort gagor.
#48 -ATTY.GEORGE S.BRI ONES,Peti t i oner ,
Thet r i alcour tt hen desi gnat ed pet i t i onerAt t y .Geor geS.Br i onesas Speci al Admi ni st r at or of t he est at e.At t y . Bri ones accept ed t he appoi nt ment ,t ook hi soathofoffice,andstart edtheadmi ni st rat i on of t he est ate.The si gni ficanthi ghl i ght s ofhi s admi ni st rat i on are l i st ed bel ow:
-ver sus-
LI LI AJ.HENSONCRUZ,RUBYJ.HENSO,et . al
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx G. R.No.159130
August22,2008
5. OnJanuary 8, 2002, At t y . Br i ones submi t t ed t he Spec i al Admi ni st r at or sFi nalRepor tf ort heappr ovaloft hecour t .Hepr ayed t hathe be pai d a commi ssi on ofP97, 850, 191. 26 r epr ese nti ng ei ght percent( 8%)oft heval ueoft heest ateunderhi sadmi ni st rat i on.
*cl ai m ofexecut oragai nstt heestat e Facts:
6. The r espondent s opposed t he appr ovaloft he finalr eportand prayedt hatt heybegr ant edan opport uni t yt oexami net hedocument s, voucher s,and r ecei pt s me nt i oned i nt he st at eme ntofi ncome and di sburse ment s.Theyl i kewi seasked t hetr i alcourtt o deny t heAt t y. Br i onescl ai m f orcommi ssi on and t hathe be or der ed t or ef und t he sum ofP134, 126. 33t ot heest at e.
RespondentRubyJ.Henson fil edon February23,1999a pet i t i on f or t heal l owanceoft hewi l lofherl at emot her ,LuzJ.Henson,wi t ht he Regi onalTri alCourt( fMani l a. RTC)o
Li l i a HensonCr uz , one of t he dece ase d’ s daught er s and al so a res pondenti nt hi spet i t i on,opposed Rubys peti t i on.Sheal l eged t hat Rubyunderst at edt heval ueoft hei rl at emot her’ sest at eandact edwi t h unconsci onabl ebadf ai t hi nt hemanagementt her eof .Li l i apraye dthat hermot her ' shol ographi cwi l lbedi sal l owedandt hatshebeappoi nt ed ast heIntest ateAdmi ni st rat ri x.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
HELD:
56
Fr om an est at e proceedi ng perspect i ve,t he Speci alAdmi ni st r at ors commi ssi on i snol essa cl ai m agai nstt heest at et han a cl ai m t hat t hi r dpart i esmaymake.Sect i on 8,Rul e86oft heRul esrec ogni zest hi s when i tpr ovi des f orCl ai m ofExecut ororAdmi ni st r at orAgai nstan Est at e.UnderSect i on13 oft hesameRul e,t heacti onoft hecourton a
( c)al l owsordi sal l ows,i n whol eori n part ,anycl ai m agai nst t he es t at e ofa deceas ed per son,orany cl ai m pre sent ed on behal foft heest at ei noffsett oacl ai m agai nsti t ;
cl ai m agai nstt heestat ei sappeal abl easi n ordi narycases. Hence,by ( d)set t l est heaccountofan execut or ,admi ni st rat or,t rust eeor guardi an;
t he expres ster msoft he Rul es,t he r ul i ng on t he ext entoft he Speci al Admi ni st r at ors commi ss i on effect i vel y, a cl ai m by t he speci aladmi ni st r atoragai nstthe est atei st he l owercourt sl ast wor dont hemat t erandonet hati sappeal abl e.
( e)const i t ut es,i nt heproceedi ngsrel ati ngtothe sett l ementof t heest at eofadeceasedper son xx xafinaldet ermi nat i on i n t hel owercourtoft heri ght soft hepartyappeal i ng,exceptt hat noappealshal lbe al l owed f r om t heappoi nt mentofaspeci al admi ni st rat or .
Undert heset er msandt aki ngi nt oaccountt hepr evi ousdi scussi on of t henatureoft hevari ouspart soft heOr derofApri l3,2002,t hel ower court s det ermi nat i on of t he speci al admi ni st rat ors commi ssi on i s cl earl y appeal abl e whi l et he audi t orsappoi nt menti s not .Thel att er , undert heexpr esst ermsoft heaboveprovi si on,can bet hesubj ectof an appropri atespeci alci vi lacti on underRul e65.
Wher e mul t i appeal s ar e al l owed,we see no r eason why a separ at e pe t i t i o nf orc l owedo er t i or ar icannotbeal nani nt e r l o c ut o r yas pe c to ft he c a s et h ati ss e pa r a t ean d di s t i n c ta s an i s s uef r o mt h ea sp e c to ft h e
.To c ase t hat has been adj udged wi t h final i t y by t he l ower co ur t
Thepet i t i oneri st hespeci aladmi ni st r at ori n aset t l eme ntofest at e,a speci alprocee di nggovernedbyRul e72t o109 oft heRevi sedRul esof Court .Sect i on1,Rul e109 i npartst at es:
r ei t erat e,t he matt erappeal ed matt erwas t he speci aladmi ni st rat ors commi ssi on,a char ge t hati s effect i vel y a cl ai m agai nstt he est at e under admi ni st r at i on, whi l et he mat t er cov er ed by t he pet i t i on f orc w heappoi nt me ntofan audi t orwhowoul d passupon er t i or ar i ast t hespeci aladmi ni st rat orsfinalaccount .By t hei rrespect i venatures, t hesemat t er scan exi sti ndependentl yofoneanot herand can proceed separat el yasenvi si onedbyt heRul esunderRul e109.
Sect i on 1.Or der s orj udgment sf r om whi c h appeal s may be An i nt er est ed person mayappeali n speci alproceedi ngs t aken. f r om an or der or j udgment r ender ed by a Court of Fi r st I nst anceora Juveni l eDomest i cRel at i onsCourt ,wher esuch orderorj udgment:
CaseDi gestbyI CE
xxxxxxxxx
CLAI MSAGAI NST ESTATE ( RULES86&88) 57
#49-ROMUALDEZV.TI GLAO
24
JULY
I SSUE/S:
1981
GR NO.L51151
Whet herornott heact i on f orr evi valwaspr operi nst ead ofpr esent i ng t hecl ai mi ntheSpeci alProceedi ngi ntheset t l ementofFel i sa’ sestat e FACTS: HELD:
Somet i me i n Mar ch 1960 Paz Romual dez and ot her s sued Ant oni o Ti gl aoandhi ssur et i eswhi ch i ncl udesFel i saTi gl aof ort hepayme ntof unpai drent al sf ort hel easeofahaci endaandi t ssugarquot a.
Theact i onf orr evi valwaspr oper .
Theappel l antar guest hatthepresentacti on i sonef ort herecovery ofasum ofmoneysothati ti sbar r edby Sec.1 ofRul e87 oft he
TheCFIofRi zalr ender ed adeci si on i nf avorofRomual dezadj udgi ng Ti gl ao and ot her sl i abl ef ort he unpai dr ent al s,damages,at t or ney’ s f eespl uscosts.
Rul esofCourt and t hatt her emedyofRomual dezand ot hersi st o
A wr i tofat t achme nthasbeen i ssued,however ,t hej udgme ntwasnot sat i sfied.
TheSC hel dt hatt heor i gi nalj udgme nt ,whi ch wasr ender ed on Ma y
presentt hei rcl ai mi n Speci alProc.No.Q10731 oft heCourtofFi rs t I nst anceofRi zal .
31,1960,hasbecomest al ebecauseofi tsnonexecut i on af t ert he l apseoffiveyears ( Sec.6,Rul e39oft heRul esofCourt ) .
Romual dezsoughtf ort he r ev i valoft hej udgmentsomet i mei n 1970 and duri ng t hatt i me Fel i sa was al r eady dead.Fel i sa’ s est at e was repre sent edbyt heSpeci alAdmi ni st rat ri xMani ngni ngTi gl ao-Nagui at.
Accor di ngl y ,i tcannotbepr esent ed agai nstt heEst at eofFel i saTi gl ao unl essi ti sfirstrevi vedbyact i on.
Mani ngni ng fil eda Mot i on t oDi smi ssar gui ngt hatunder Sec.1 of
Thi si spr eci sel ywhyRomual dezandot her shavei nst i t ut edt hesecond
Rul e 87 oft he Rul esofCourt ," No act i on upon a cl ai m f ort he
s ui t hoseobj w ecti snott omaket heEst at eofFel i saTi gl aopayt he
r ecover y of money or debt or i nter es t t her eon shal l be
sumsofmoneyadj udgedi nthefir stj udgmentbutmer el ytokeep
commenced agai nstt heexecutororadmi ni st r at or . ”
hat t he sums t her ei n awarded can be al i ve sai dj udgment so t present edascl ai msagai nstt heest at ei n Speci alPr oc.No.Q10731 of t heCourtofFi rstI nstanceofRi zal .
Thel owercour tnever t hel essgr ant edt her evi val . Hence,an appealbyt heest at eofFel i sa.
WHEREFORE,findi ngnoer r ori nt hej udgme nti nsof arast heEst at e ofFel i saTi gl ao i s concer ned,i t s appeali s her eby DI SMI SSED wi t h 58
costsagai nstt heappel l ant . Al f onso al so fil ed a Pet i t i on f orLe t t er s ofAdmi ni st r at i on,as wel las fil ed a Compl ai nt f or t he Annul ment /Resc i ssi on of Extr a Judi ci al Set t l ementofEst ate.
ACTI ONS BY OR AGAI NST EXECUTOR OR ADMI NI STRATOR ( RULES87& 89)
Pe t i t i o ne r sr ai sedt heaffi r mat i vedef enset hatr espondent sar enot the real parti esi ni nterest but r at her t he Est at e of Al f onso O. #50-RI OFERI O V.CA
Or finada, Jr .i n vi ew of t he pendency of t he admi ni st r at i on proceedi ngs.
13 JANUARY 2004
GR NO.129008 I SSUE/S:
Whet herornott he hei r s ma y br i ng sui tt or ecoverpr oper t y oft he est at ependi ngt heappoi nt mentofan admi ni st rat or .
FACTS:
Af onsoOr finada,Jr .di ed wi t houta wi l ll eavi ng sever alper sonaland realpropert i esl ocatedi nAngel esCi t y,Dagupan andKal ookan Ci t y.He al sol ef tawi dow,t he r es pondentEsper anza Or finada,whom he had sevenchi l drenwhower eal sorespondent si nt hi scase.
HELD:
Pendi ng t he fil i ng ofadmi ni st r at i on procee di ngs,t hehei r s wi t hout doubthavel egalpersonal i t ytobri ngsui ti n behal foft heestat eoft he decedenti n accor dancewi t ht he provi si on ofArt i cl e 777 oft he New Ci vi lCode " t hat( t ) he ri ght st o successi on aretr ansmi t t ed f rom t he momentoft hedeathoft hedecedent . "
The decedent al so l ef t hi s par amour and t hei r chi l dr en,t hey ar e pet i t i oner Teodora Ri of eri o and co-peti t i oners Veroni ca, Al bert o and Rowena.
The pr ovi si on i nt ur ni st he f oundat i on oft he pr i nci pl et hat t he propert y , ri ght s and obl i gat i ons t ot he ext ent and val ue of t he i nher i t anceofaper son aret r ansmi t t ed t hr ough hi sdeat ht oanot her orothersbyhi swi l lorbyoperat i on ofl aw.
On Nov .1995,r espondent s Al f onso James and Lour des ( l egi t i mat e chi l dren oft hedeceased)di scover ed t hatpeti t i onerTeodoraand her chi l dren execut ed an Ext raj udi ci alSet t l ementofEst at eofaDeceased Person wi t h Qui t cl ai m i nvol vi ng t he pr opert i es oft he est at e oft he decedentl ocat edi nDagupanCi t y .
Eveni fadmi ni st r at i on proceedi ngshaveal r eadybeen commenced,t he 59
hei rsmay st i l lbri ng t he sui ti fan admi ni st rat orhas notyetbeen appoi nt ed. Thi si st he proper modal i t y despi t et he t ot al l ack of adver t ence t ot he hei r si nt he rul eson part yr epres ent at i on namel y Sec.3,Rul e3andSec.2,Rul e87oft heRul esofCourt .
Themoney( r ent al s)al l egedl yduei snotpr oper t yi nt hehandsoft he admi ni st rat or ,i ti snott huswi t hi nt heeffect i vecont roloft heprobat e cour t . Nei t her does i t come wi t hi nt he conce pt of money of t he decease d“ conceal ed, embezz l ed, or conveye d away” , whi ch woul d conf erupon t hecourti nci dent alprer ogati vet ore ach outi t sarmsto geti tbackand,i fnecessaryt oci t ethepossessort hereofi ncont empt.
ACTI ONS BY OR AGAI NST EXECUTOR OR ADMI NI STRATOR ( RULES87& 89)
I SSUE/S: #51-DELA CRUZV.CAMON
30APRI L1966
Whet herornott headmi ni st r at orcandemandbyme r emot i on.
GR NO.L21034
HELD:
NO.When t he demand i si nf avoroft headmi ni st r at orand t hepar t y
FACTS:
rd part y,notunderthe court agai nstwhom i ti senf or ced i sa thi ’ s
j ur i sdi ct i on, t he demand can not be by me r e mo t i on by t he
Theest at eofThomasFal l on and AnneFal l on Mur phy wasownerof 2/4shareproi ndi vi soofHaci endaRosari oi nNegrosOcci dent al .
admi ni st rat or , but by an i ndependent act i on agai nst t he t hi r d person.
Thatwhol e haci enda was hel di nl ease by Emi l i o Camon si nce l ong bef or et hepr esenti nt est at epr oceedi ngswer ecommenced. Camon i sa t hi r d person,hence,t headmi ni st r at ormaynotpul lhi m agai nsthi swi l l ,bymoti on,i nt otheadmi ni st rat i on proceedi ngs.Weare f ort i fied i nourvi ew t hatevenmatt ersaffect i ngpropert yunderj udi ci al admi ni st r at i on may notbe t aken cogni zance ofbythe courti nt he
Somet i mei n Oct .1962,t headmi ni st r at oroft heest at e( Del a Cruz) move dt ot hecour tf oran or dert o di r ectEmi l i o Camon t o pay t he est at e’ s2/4 shar eoft herent al son Haci endaRosari o.Emi l i oCamon chal l enged t heprobat ecourt ’ sj uri sdi ct i on overhi sperson.Thecourt
courseofi nt est ateproceedi ngs,i fthei nterest soft hi rdpersonsare prej udi ced.
he demand f or r ent al s cannot be made “by mer e r ul ed t hat t mot i on by t he admi ni st r at or but by i ndependent act i on. ” The
admi ni st rat orappeal ed. Cas eDi gestbyRAYMOND 60
Al ej andr oopposet hesai dpet i t i on cl ai mi ngt hatt het est at epr oceedi ng had al r eady bee n cl ose d and t er mi nat ed and t hat he ceas ed as a consequencet obet heexecut oroft heest at eoft hedeceased;andt hat Juani t aLopezi sgui l t yofl achesandnegl i gencei nfil i ngt hepet i t i onof t hedel i veryofhershare4yearsaf t ersuchcl osureoft heest ate,when shecoul d havefil ed apet i t i on f orrel i efofj udgmentwi t hi n si xty( 60) daysf r om Dec ember15,1960
#55-Gui l asvsj udgeCFIPampanga
Facts: on 1936 Jaci nt aexec ut edawi l li nst i t ut i ngherhusband Al ej androas hersol ehei randexecut or I nt heyear1953Juani t aLopez, wasdecl are dl egal l yadopt eddaught er and l egalhei roft he spousesJaci nt a and Al ej andro . Af t eradopt i ng l egal l yherei n pet i t i onerJuani t aLopez,t hetest atri xDoñaJaci nt adi d notexecuteanot herwi l lorcodi ci lsoas t oi ncl udeJuani t a Lopez as oneofherhei rs.
I nherr epl yJuani t acont endst hatt heact ualdel i veryanddi st ri but i on oft heher edi t arysharest ot hehei rs ,and nott heor deroft hecourt decl ari ng as cl osed and t er mi nat ed t he procee di ngs,det er mi nesthe t er mi nat i on of t he probate pr oceedi ngs t he probate court l oses j ur i sdi ct i on ofan est at eunderadmi ni st r at i on onl yaf t ert hepayme nt ofallt hetaxes,andaft ert heremaini ngestatei sdel i veredt othehei rs ent i t l ed t orecei vethesame" ) ;t hattheexecut orAl ej androi sest opped f r om opposi ngherpet i t i on becausehewast heonewhopr epar ed,fil ed andsecuredcourtapprovalof ,t heaf oresai dproj ectofpart i t i on,whi ch sheseekst obei mpl ement ed;t hatshei snotgui l t yofl aches,because when she fil ed on Jul y 20,1964,herpet i t i on f orhedel i ver y ofher shareal l ocat edt oherundert heproj ectofpart i t i on,l essthan 3years had el apse df r om August28, 1961 when t he amended pr oj ec t of part i t i on was approve d, whi ch i s wi t hi nt he 5-y ear per i od f or the exec ut i onofj udgmentbymot i on.
I nt he Test at e Proceedi ngs t he wi l l was admi t t ed t o probatet he surv i vi ng husband, Al ej andr o Lopez y Si ongco, was appoi nt ed execut or i n a proj ectofpart i t i on execut ed by bot h Al ej androand Juani t a,t he ri ghtofJuani t at oi nher i tf r om Jaci nt a was r ecogni zed and 2 l ot s wher egi vent oJuani t a. t hel owercourtapprovedthesai dproj ectofparti t i on anddi rect edt hat t herec or ds oft hecasebesentt othearc hi ves,upon paymentoft he est ateandi nheri t ancet axes
I ssue:
on Apri l1964,herei n pet i t i onerJuani t aLopez-Gui l asfil ed aseparat e ordi nary act i on t osetasi deand annult heproj ectofpart i t i onon t he gr ound of l esi on, perpet r at i on and f r aud, and pray f ur t her t hat Al ej andr o Lopezbeor der ed t o submi ta st at eme ntofaccount sofal l t he cr ops and t o del i veri mmedi at el yt o Juani t al ot si nt he proj ect par t i t i o n.
won j uani t ascont ent i on i scorrecti nst ati ngt hatt heactualdel i very and di st ri but i on oft heher edi t ary sharest ot hehei rs ,and nott he orderoft hecourtdecl ari ngascl osedandt ermi nat edt hepr oceedi ngs, det ermi nest het ermi nat i onoft heprobateproceedi ngs Hel d:
Whi l ei nt he Test at e Pr oceedi ngs No.1426,Juani t a fil ed a pet i t i on dat edJul y20,1964 prayi ngthatAl ej andr oLopezbedi r ect edt odel i ver t ohert heactualpossessi on ofsai d2 l otsaswel lasthel esseesoft he sai dt wol ots.
Thepr obat ecour tl osesj ur i sdi ct i on ofan est at eunderadmi ni st r at i on onl y af t ert he paymentofal lt he debt s and t he r emai ni ng es t at e 61
del i veredt ot hehei rsent i t l ed t orecei vethesame.Thefinal i t yoft he approvaloft heproj ectofpart i t i on by i t sel fal onedoes nott ermi nate t heprobat eproceedi ng
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and CONCORDI A JAVELLANA VI LLANUEVA,respondents.
Fact s: as l ong as t he or der oft he di st ri but i on oft he est at e has notbeen compl i edwi t h,t heprobatepr oceedi ngscannotbedeemedcl osedand t ermi nat ed
Case i nvol vesthe est at e ofEst eban Javel l ana,Jr .di ed a bachel or , wi t hout descendant s, ascendant s, br ot her s, si st er s, nephews or ni eces. Hi s onl y survi vi ng re l ati ves are: ( 1)hi , s mat er nal aunt
becausea j udi ci alpart i t i on i snotfinaland concl usi veand doesnot pre ventt hehei rf r om bri ngi ngan act i on t oobt ai n hi sshare,provi ded t heprescri pti veperi od t heref orhas notel apsed ( Marivs.Boni l l a,83 Phi l . ,137)
nst erhal f si st erofhi s mother pet i t i oner Cel edoni aSol i vi o,the spi , hepri vater espondent Sal ust i aSol i vi o;and( 2)t ,Concordi aJavel l anasterofhisdeceased f ather Vi l l anueva,si ,Est eban Javel l ana,Sr .
Duri nghi sl i f et i me,Est eban,Jr.had,moret han once,expres sedt ohi s auntCel edoni aandsomecl osef ri endshi spl an t opl acehi sest at ei na f oundat i on t o honor hi s mot her and t o hel p poor but dese r vi ng st udent sobt ai n a col l egeeducat i on. Cel edoni at ol d Concor di a about Est eban' sdesi r et opl acehi sest at ei n af oundat i on t obenamedaf t er hi smot her ,f r om whom hi spr opert i escame,f ort hepurposeofhel pi ng i ndi gentst udent si nt hei rschool i ng.Concordi aagreedtocarryoutt he pl an oft hedeceased.Thi sf actwasadmi t t edbyheri n her" Mot i on t o Reopen and/orReconsi dert heOr derdat edApri l3,1978"whi ch she fil edonJul y27,1978 i nSpeci alProceedi ngNo.2540,st at i ngt hat
Sect i on 1ofRul e90 oft heRevi sedRul esofCourtof1964 aswor ded, whi ch secur es f or t he hei r s or l egat ees t he r i ghtt o" demand and recovert hei rr espect i vesharesf rom t heexecut ororadmi ni st rat or ,or any ot herperson havi ng t hesame i n hi spossess i on" ,r est at esthe af oreci t eddoctri nes. I nt hecaseatbar,t hemoti on fil edbypet i t i onerf orthedel i veryofher sharewasfil edon Jul y20,1964,whi chi sj ustmoret han 3year sf r om August28,1961 when t heame nded pr oj ectofpar t i t i on wasappr ove and wi t hi n 5 year sf r om Apri l23,1960 when t heori gi nalproj ectof part i t i on was approve d. Cl ear l y, her ri ght t o cl ai m t he t wo l ot s al l ocat edt oherundert heproj ectofpart i t i on had notyetexpi red.And i nt hel i ghtofSect i on 1 ofRul e90 oft heRevi sed Rul esofCourtof 1964 andt hej uri sprudenceaboveci t ed,t heor derdat edDecember15, 1960oft heprobat ecourtcl osi ngandt ermi nati ngtheprobatecasedi d notl egal l yter mi natet het est ateproceedi ngs,f orhershareundert he proj ectofparti t i on hasnotbeen del i veredt oher .
Pet i t i oner knew al l al ong t he narr at ed f act si n t he i mmedi at el y precedi ng paragr aph [ t hather ei n movanti sal so t herel ati veoft he deceased wi t hi nt hethi r d degre e,shebei ngthe youngersi st eroft he l ateEst eban Javel l ana,f atheroft hedecedentherei n] ,becaus er p i ort o t he fil i ng o ft he p et i t i o nt he y( p et i t i o ne rCe l e do ni aSo l i v i o and mo v ant Co nc o r di aJ av e l l an a)ha v eag r e e dt oma ket h ee s t a t eo ft h ede c e de nta
des t heyhavecl osel yknown each ot herduet ot hei r f oundat i on,besi fil i ati on t othedecedentand t heyhavebeenvi si t i ngeachot her ' shouse whi char enotf arawayf or( si c)eachot her .
#56
-
CELEDONI A
t i t i one r , SOLI VI O,pe
Pur suantt ot hei ragre ementt hatCel edoni a woul dt ake car e oft he proceedi ngs l eadi ngtothe f ormati on oft hef oundat i on,Cel edoni ai n
vs. 62
good f ai t h andupon t headvi ceofhercounsel ,fil edon Marc h 8,1977 Spl .Pr oceedi ngNo.2540f orherappoi nt mentasspeci aladmi ni st rat ri x oft he est at e ofEst eban Javel l ana,Jr.( Exh.2) .Late r ,she fil ed an amended peti t i on ( Exh.5)prayi ng t hatl et t ersofadmi ni st rat i on be i ssuedt oher ;t hatshebedecl aredsol ehei roft hedeceased;andt hat af t erpaymentofal lcl ai msandr endi t i on ofi nventoryandaccount i ng, t heest atebeadj udi catedtoher .
I SSUE:1. whet herBranch 26 oft heRTC ofI l oi l ohad j uri sdi ct i on t o
ent ert ai n Ci vi lCaseNo.13207 f orpart i t i on andr ecoveryofConcordi a Vi l l anueva' sshar eoft heest at eofEst ebanJavel l ana,Jr .evenwhi l et he probat eproceedi ngs( Spl .Proc.No.2540)wer esti l lpendi ngi n Branch 23oft hesamecourt ;
Thecour tdecl ar edhert hesol ehei rofEst eban,Jr .Ther eaf t er ,shesol d pr opert i esoft heest atet opayt het axes and ot herobl i gat i onsoft he
HELD:
SC finds meri ti nt hepet i t i oner' scont ent i on t hatt heRegi onalTr i al Cour t , Br anch 26, l acked j ur i sdi ct i on t o ent er t ai n Concordi a Vi l l anueva' sact i onf orpar t i t i on andr ecover yofhershar eoft heest at e ofEst eban Javel l ana,Jr.whi l et heprobat eproceedi ngs( Spl ,Proc.No. 2540)f ort heset t l ementofsai dest atearest i l lpendi ngi nBranch23of t hesamecourt ,t her ebei ngasyetnoor dersf ort hesubmi ssi on and approvaloft headmi ni st rat i x' si nvent oryand account i ng,di st ri but i ng t heresi dueoft heest atet othehei r ,andt ermi nati ngtheproceedi ngs`
dece ase d and pr oce eded t o se tup t he" SALUSTI A SOLI VI O VDA.DE ch she caused t o be r egi st er ed i nt he J AVELLANA FOUNDATI ON"whi Securi t i esandExchangeCommi ssi on. Concordi a Javel l ana Vi l l anueva fil ed a mot i on f orreconsi derati on of t he court ' s orderdecl ari ng Cel edoni a as " sol e hei r"ofEst eban,Jr . , becauseshet oowasan hei roft hedeceased. hermo t i on wasdeni ed by t he cour tf ort ar di nessI nst ead ofappeal i ng t he deni al ,Concor di a fil ed wi t h t he rt c of Il oi l of or part i t i on, recover y of possessi on, owner shi panddamages .
The assai l ed or der ofJudge Adi li n Spl .Pr oc.No.2540 decl ar i ng Cel edoni a as t hesol ehei roft heestat eofEst eban Javel l ana,Jr .di d nott ol lt he end oft he procee di ngs . I n vi ew oft he pendency oft he probat eproceedi ngsi n Branch 11 oft heCourtofFi rs tI nst ance( now RTC,Br anch 23) ,Concor di a' smot i on t osetasi de t heor derdecl ari ng Cel edoni a as sol e hei rofEst eban,and t o haveher sel f( Concor di a) decl are d as cohei rand r ecove rhershareoft he propert i es oft he deceased,waspr operl yfil edbyheri nSpl .Proc.No.2540.Herr emedy when t he cour tdeni ed hermo t i on,was t o el evat et he deni alt ot he CourtofAppeal sf orrevi ew on certi orari .However,i nst eadofavai l i ngof t hatr emedy,shefil ed moret han oneyearl at er ,aseparat eacti on f or t hesamepurposei nBr anch26oft hecourt .Wehol dthatt heseparat e act i on was i mpr oper l y fil ed f or i ti s t he pr obat e court t hat hase j uri sdi ct i on t o makea j ustand l egaldi st ri but i on oft he xc l us i v e
t ri alcourtr endered i tj udgementi nf avorofConcor di a Javel l ana Vi l l anueva. t he t r i al cour t or der ed t he execut i on of i t sj udgme nt pendi ng appealand r equi r ed Cel edoni at o submi tan i nvent oryand account i ng oft heest at e.I n hermot i onsf orreconsi der ati on oft hose order s,Cel edoni a aver r ed t hatt he propert i es oft he deceased had al r eady been t r ansf er r ed t o, and wer ei nt he posses si on of ,t he ' Sal ust i aSol i vi oVda. deJavel l ana Foundati on. " The tr i al courtdeni ed hermoti onsf orr econsi derat i on. Cel edoni a appeal ed t ot he ca and r ender ed j udgment affir mi ng t he de c i s i o no ft het r i alc our t .
e s t a t e .
63
i nt he i nt er es t of or der l y proc edur e and t o avoi d conf usi ng and confli ct i ng di sposi t i ons of a decedent ' s est at e, a court shoul d not i nt erf erewi t hprobat eproceedi ngspendi ngi naco-equalcourt .
cont i nued l i vi ngtoget herashusband and wi f e,hi sf athersupport i ng t hem andi nt r oduci nghi mt othepubl i cashi snaturalchi l d;t hatev en t hef ami l yofhi sf at herr ecogni zedhi m assuch;t haton oraboutt he year1944,hi sf at herand mo t hersepar at ed,and subsequent l y ,hi s f athermarri edherei n pet i t i onerNati vi dad delRosari o;t hatasa resul t oft hemarri age,t wo( 2)chi l dren wer ebornher ei n peti t i onersLourdes Al ber t oandAnt oni oAl ber t o,Jr .
Theor der soft heRegi onalTr i alCour t ,Br anch 26,i n Ci vi lCaseNo. 13207 set t i ng asi de t hepr obat epr oceedi ngsi n Br anch 23 ( f ormer l y Br anch 11)on t hegroundofext ri nsi cf r aud,and decl ari ngConcor di a Vi l l anueva t o bea cohei rofCel edoni at ot heest at eofEst eban,Jr . , orderi ngt hepart i t i on oft heest ate,and requi ri ngt headmi ni st rat ri x,
hi sf atherdi ed,and wi t houtnot i ce t o hi m,pet i t i onerNat i vi dad del Rosari oVda.deAl bert o,on Jul y17,1949,i nst i t ut ed bef oret hethen CourtofFi r stI nst ance ofMani l a an i nt est at e proceedi ngs f or t he est ateofhi sdeceased f ather ,docket ed t herei n asSpeci alProceedi ngs No. 9092; t hat i n t he sai d i nt es t at e proc eedi ngs, pet i t i oner s del i berat el yomi t t ed hi m as oneoft hehei rsand f ort hi sreason t hey succeeded i n havi ngthepr opert i esofhi sdeceased f atheradj udi cat ed andpart i t i onedamongthemsel ves;t hatt hesai di nt est at epr oceedi ngs wer et er mi nat edonNovember9,1953;
Cel edoni a,t osubmi tan i nvent oryand account i ngoft heest at e , er w e i mpr oper andoffi ci o say t he l east ,f or t hese mat t er s he ous ,t wi t hi nt heexcl usi vecompet enceoft hepr obat ecour t . x
#57-G. R.No.L29759 May18,1989 NATI VI DAD DEL ROSARI O VDA. DE ALBERTO,i n heri ndi vi dual
havi ng no knowl edgeoft hei nt es t at epr ocee di ngsand camet o know about i t onl yr ec ent l y and t her eupon made a demand f r om t he peti t i onerswho r ef used t o gi vehi m hi sshare.Accordi ngl y,heprays t hatt hepet i t i oner sbeorderedt oacknowl edgehi m asthenat uralchi l d ofAnt oni oC.Al bert o;t hathi sonef ourt hsharebet urnedovert ohi m
capaci t y and as j udi ci al guar di an of the mi nors ANTONI O ALBERTO,
JR.
and
LOURDES
ALBERTO,pe t i t i one r s,
vs. THE HON.COURT OF APPEALS and ANTONI O J.ALBERTO,JR. , as si st ed by hi s mot her as hi s nat ural guar di an, ANDREA JONGCO,respondents.
peti t i onersfil eda Mot i on t oDi smi sson t hegroundst hat( 1)t hecause ofact i on i sbarr edbypri orj udgment ;and( 2)t hatt hecauseofact i on i sal sobarredbythe st atut eofl i mi t ati on. The t ri alcourti ssued an Orderdenyi ngt heMot i on t oDi smi ss.Butaf t ert her espondentfil edan answer t ot he co mpl ai nt t he Courtor der st he di smi ss aloft he compl ai nt. Pri vat e r espondent , not sat i sfied wi t h t he deci si on, appeal edtor espondentCourt ,re spondentCourtrev ers edthedeci si on oft het r i alc our t .
Facts: i n1941 hi sal l egedf ather ,Ant oni oC.Al bert o,andhi smot her ,Andrea Jongco,l i ved t oge t herashusband and wi f eand asar esul tofwhi ch, he wasbor n on Sept ember10,1942;t hatdur i ng t he t i met hathi s al l egedf at herand mot herl i vedt oget herashusband and wi f eand up t otheti meofhi sbi rt h,bothwer esi ngl eandhad nol egali mpedi ment t o marr y each ot her ;t hataf t erhi s bi r t h,hi sf at herand mot her
MR wasfil edandwasdeni edthust hi si nst antpet i t i on.
64
I SSUE: won THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED I N HOLDI NG THAT RESPONDENT ALBERTO JR. ' S CAUSE OF ACTI ON WASNOTBARRED BYPRI OR JUDGMENT.
r egl ement ary peri od,i nst ead ofan i ndependentact i on,t he effectof whi ch,i fsuccessf ul ,woul dbe,asi nt hei nst antcase,f oranot hercour t orj udge t ot hr ow outadeci si on ororderal r eady finaland exec ut ed andreshufflepropert i esl ongagodi st ri but edanddi sposedof.
HELD: Pet i t i onersal l eged t hatthei nt est ateproceedi ngsf ort heset t l ementof est at e oft he deceased Ant oni o C.Al bert o( Speci alProce edi ngs No. 9092)hadal r eadybeen t er mi nat edon Nove mber9,1953 byt heorder ofdi st ri but i on di rect i ngthedel i veryoft heresi dueoft heest atetothe per sonsent i t l ed t here t o and t hati n sai d proceedi ngs t hecourtal so decl aredwhoar et hehei rsoft hedeceased.Consequent l y,t hei nst ant casewhi chseekst osecuret herecogni t i on ofAnt oni oJ.Al bert o,Jr.as an acknowl edged nat uralchi l doft hedeceasedi nordert oestabl i shhi s ri ght s t o t he i nheri t ance i s al r eady barr ed by pri or j udgment ( Pet i t i oners'Bri ef ,p.47)despi t epri vat erespondent ' si nsi st encethathe had noknowl edgeornot i ceoft hei nt est at epr oceedi ngsofhi sal l eged naturalf ather
Casedi ges tbyKi m and Buts i #58 Reyesvs.Barr et t oDatu Facts : Bi bi anoBarr et t o was marr i ed t o Mari a Ger ar do.Duri ng t hei r
l i f et i me,t heyacqui redvastest ate( realpropertyi nMani l a,Pampanga andBul acan) .WhenBi bi anodi ed( Feb.18,1936) ,hel ef thi ssharei na wi l lt o Sal udBar r et t o( mot her of t he mi nor s) and Luci a Mi l agr os Barret t o;and a smal lport i on as l egaci estohi ssi st ersRosa Barret t o andFel i saBarr et t o and hi s nephew and ni ece s. The usuf r uctofa fishpond was r es er ve d f or Mar i a ( t he wi dow) . Asappoi nt ed admi ni st rat ri x,Mari apreparedaproj ectofpart i t i on,si gned by heri n herownbehal fandasguardi an of t hemi norMi l agros.I twasapprove d, and t heest at ewas di st ri but ed and t heshare sdel i ver ed.Sal ud t ook i mmedi at eposse ssi on ofher share and sec ur ed t he cancel l at i on of OCTs and i ssuance ofnew t i t l es i n hername. Upon Mari a’ s deat h ( Mar .5,1948) ,i twas di scover ed t hatsheexecut ed t wo wi l l s:i nt he first ,shei nst i t ut edSal udandMi l agrosasherhei rs;i nt hesecond,she revoked t hesameandl ef tal lherpropert i esi nf avorofMi l agrosal one. Thel at erwi l lwasal l owed and t hefir str ej ect ed.I nr ej ect i ngt hefir st wi l l pr esent ed by Ti r so Reyes ( asguar di an of t he chi l dr en of Sal udBarr et t o) ,t heTC hel dt hatSal ud wasnott hedaught eroft he dece dentMar i abyherhusband Bi bi ano.TheSC affir medt hesame. TC:The pr oj ect ofpar t i t i on submi t t ed i nt he pr oceedi ngs f or t he set t l ementoft heestat eofBi bi anoi snul l andvoi dab i ni t i o( notmerel y voi dabl e)because t he di st r i but ee ( Sal ud) ,pr edecessorofTi r soet .al . , wasnota daught eroft heSps.Bi bi ano and Mar i a.Thenul l i t yoft he proj ectofpart i t i on was decre ed on t hebasi s ofArt .1081 ( OCC)( A
Pet i t i oners'submi ssi on i si mpressedwi t hmeri t . Thi s Cour t has i nvar i abl yr ul ed t hat i nsol vency pr oceedi ngs and set t l ementofadecedent ' sest atearebothproceedi ngsi whi char e nr em bi ndi ng agai nstt he whol e wor l d.Al lper sons havi ng i nt er esti nt he subj ectmatt eri nvol ved,whet hert heywer enot i fied ornot ,areequal l y bound.The cour tacqui r es j ur i sdi ct i on over al lper sons i nt er est ed, t hr ough t hepubl i cat i on oft henot i cepre scri bed . . .andanyordert hat may be ente r ed t her ei ni s bi ndi ng agai nstal loft hem . I twas rul ed f urt herthata finalor derofdi st ri but i on oft he est ateofa deceased person vest sthet i t l etothel andoft heestat ei nt hedi st ri but ees;and t hatt heonl yi nst ancewher eapart yi nt er est edi naprobat epr oceedi ng mayhaveafinall i qui dat i onsetasi dei swhenhei sl ef toutbyr eason of ci r cumst ancesbeyond hi scont r olort hr ough mi st akeori nadver t ence noti mput abl etonegl i gence.Even t hen,t hebet t erpract i cetosecure r el i efi sr eopeni ng oft he same case by propermot i on wi t hi nt he
65
part i t i on i n whi ch aper son wasbel i evedt obean hei r ,wi t houtbei ng so,hasbeeni ncl uded,shal lbenul landvoi d) .AsMi l agroswastheonl y t rue hei rofBi bi ano,she was enti t l ed t or ecove rf r om Sal ud and her successorsal lt hepropert i esrecei ved by herf rom Bi bi ano’ sest ate,i n vi ew of Ar t .1456( NCC)whi ch st at est hatpr oper t yacqui r edbymi st ake or f r aud i s hel d by i t s acqui r er i n i mpl i edt rust f or t he r eal owner . Havi ngl ostt hefightf ora shar ei nt heest at eofMari a asher l egi t i mat ehei r ,Ti rsonow f al l sback upon t heremnant oft heestat eof Bi bi ano( t hefishpond) ,whi ch wasgi veni n usuf ructt oMari a.Hence, t hi s act i on f or t he r ecovery of t he one-hal fport i on t hereof . Thi s act i on affor ded Mi l agr os an opport uni t yt o se t up her r i ght of ownershi p;not onl yoft hefishpondunderl i t i gati on,butofal lt heother propert i eswi l l edanddel i veredtoSal ud,f orbei ngaspuri oushei r ,and notent i t l ed t o any share i nt he est at e ofBi bi ano,t her eby di r ect l y att acki ng t he val i di t y,notonl yofthe proj ectofpart i t i on,butofthe deci si onoft hecourtbasedt her eonaswel l .
i mpi nged on t hel egi t i me ofMi l agros,Sal ud di d notf orthatreason cease t o be a t est amentary hei r of Bi bi ano. Nor does the f act t hat Mi l agros was al l ot t ed i n herf ather’ swi l la sharesmal l ert han her l egi t i mei nval i datethe i nst i t ut i on ofSal udas hei r ,si ncetherewas no pret eri t i on ortot alomi ssi on ofa f orced hei rher e. The vi ew t hatthe part i t i on i n quest i on i svoi df orbei ngacompromi seon t heci vi lst atus ofSal ud,i n vi ol at i onofArt .1814 ( OCC)i serr oneous.A compromi se pr es uppose s t he se t t l ement of a co nt r ov er sy t hrough mut ual concessi onsoft hepart i es;and t hecondi t i on ofSal ud asdaught erof t het est at orBi bi ano,whi l eunt rue,wasat noti medi sput edduri ngthe set t l ementoft heest at eoft est at or .Ther ecan be nocompromi seover i ssues not i ndi sput e. Whi l e a compromi se ove r ci vi l st at us i s prohi bi t ed,t hel aw nowheref orbi dsaset t l ementbythepart i esovert he sharet hatshoul d corr espond t oa cl ai mantt otheestat e. Atanyrat e, i ndependent l y of t he proj ect of part i t i on ( a mer e proposal f or di st ri but i on ofest ate) ,i ti sthecourt al onethatmakesthedi st ri but i on oft heest at eanddet ermi nesthepersonsent i t l edt here t oandt hepart s t owhi cheach i sent i t l ed.I ti sthatj udi ci aldecreeofdi st ri but i on,once final ,t hatvest st i t l ei n the di st ri but ees. Whereacourthas val i dl y i ssuedadecreeofdi st ri but i on oft heest at e,andthesamehasbecome final ,the val i di t y ori nval i di t y ofthe pr oj ect ofpart i t i on becomes i r r e l e v ant .
I ssues/Hel d:
( 1) W/N t he part i t i on f r om whi ch Sal ud acqui r ed t he fishpond i n questi on i svoi d ab i ni t i o andSal uddi dnotacqui reval i dti t l et oi t .No. ( 2)W/N Mi l agros’acti oni sbarredbythestat ut eofl i mi t ati ons.YES.
( 2)Mi l agroscont endst hatasMari acoul dnothavei gnoredt hatSal ud was notherchi l d,t he actofMar i ai nagr eei ng t ot he par t i t i on and di st ri but i on was af raud on herri ght sand ent i t l eshert obel i ef .Thi s cont ent i on i sunf ounded. Fi rs t ,t herei snoevi dencethatwhenBi bi ano’ s est at ewasj udi ci al l yset t l ed and di st ri but ed,Sal ud knew t hatshewas notBi bi ano’ schi l d.Thus,i ff r aud was commi t t ed,i twas Mari a who wassol el yr esponsi bl e;and nei t her Sal ud norhermi norchi l dr en can be hel dl i abl et her ef or . Second,gr ant i ng t her e was such f r aud,r el i ef t her ef or can be obt ai ned wi t hi n 4 year sf r om i t s di sco ve ry , and t her ecor dshowst hatt hi speri odhadel apsedal ongt i meago. Att he t i meofdi st ri but i on,Mi l agroswasonl y16.Shebecameofage5 year s l ater( 1944) .Ont hatyear ,hercauseofacti on accruedt ocont eston t he
Rat i o( 1)Art .1081 ( OCC)i smi sappl i ed! Sal ud admi t t edl y had been i nst i t ut ed hei ri n Bi bi ano’ sl astwi l landt est ame ntt oget herwi t h Mi l agr os.Hence,t hepart i t i on had bet ween t hem coul d notbeone such had wi t h a part ywho was bel i ev ed t o be an hei rwi t houtr eal l y bei ngone,andwasnotnul landvoi dunderAr t .1081.Thel egal pr ecept ofArt .1081 doesnotspeak ofchi l dren,ordescendant s,butofhei rs ( wi t houtdi st i nct i on bet weenf orced,vol unt ary ori nt est ateones) ,and t hef actt hatSal ud di d nothappen t o be a daught eroft het est at or doesnotprec l ude herbei ngoneoft hehei r sexpr essl ynamed i n hi s t est ament ;f orBi bi ano was atl i bert yt o assi gn t hef reeport i on ofhi s est at et owhomsoeve rhechose.Whi l et heshare( ½)assi gnedtoSal ud
66
ground off raud t he courtdecre e di st ri but i ng herf ather’ s est at eand t he 4-ye ar peri od ofl i mi t at i on st art ed t o run,t o expi r ei n 1948. Concedi ngt hatMi l agrosonl ybecameawareoft het ruef act si n 1946, heracti on sti l lbecame e xt i ncti n 1950. Heracti on was barr ed i n Aug. 1956,when shefil edhercount er cl ai mi nt hi scasecont est i ngt he decr eeofdi st ri but i on ofBi bi ano’ sest at e. Ther ei snoevi denceofan al l eged verbalpromi sebyTi rsot oreconveythepropert i esrecei ved by Sal ud, whi chal l egedl yi nducedMi l agrost odel aythefil i ngoft heacti on. Gr ant i ngthatt her ewassuchpromi se,i t woul dnotbi ndTi r so’ swards, whoar et her ealpar t i esi ni nt er est .An abdi cat i vewai verofr i ght sby aguardi an,bei ng an actofdi sposi t i on,and notofadmi ni st r at i on, cannotbi nd hi swar ds,bei ng nul land voi das t ot hem unl essdul y aut hori zedbyt hepropercourt
t hei rr el ati onshi p al so ended i n a di vor ce.St i l li nt he U. S. A. ,she marr i edf ort het hi r dt i me,t oa cer t ai n Wer ni mont .On 16 Apri l1972 Ar t ur o di ed.Hel ef tno wi l l .On 31 August1972 Li no Javi erI nci ong fil ed a pet i t i on wi t ht he Regi onalTri alCourtofQuezon Ci t yf or i ssuance of l et t ers of admi ni st rat i on concerni ng the estat e of Ar t ur o i n f avor of t he Phi l i ppi ne Tr ust Company .Respondent Bl andi naDandan ( al sor ef er r ed t oas Bl andi naPadl an) ,c l ai mi ngt o be t he survi vi ng spouse ofArt ur o Padl an,and Cl aro,Al exi s,Ri car do, Emmanuel ,Zenai daand Yol anda,al lsurnamedPadl an,namedi nt he chi l dren ofArt ur o Padl an opposed t hepet i t i on and prayed f ort he appoi nt menti nst eadofAt t y.LeonardoCasaba, whi chwasres ol vedi n f avorof t hel att er .Upon mot i on oft heopposi t orst hemsel ves,At t y. Cabasalwasl at err epl aced by Hi gi noCast i l l on.On 30 Apri l1973 t he opposi t or s ( Bl andi na and Padl anchi l dre n) submi t t ed cer t i fied phot ocopi esoft he19Jul y1950pri vat ewri t i ngandt hefinalj udgment ofdi vor ce bet ween pet i t i onerand Art ur o.Lat erRupert o T.Padl an, cl ai mi ng t o be t he sol e survi vi ng brot her of t he deceased Art ur o, i nt er ve ned.On 7 Oct ober1987 pet i t i onermove df ort he i mmedi at e decl arati on ofhei rsoft hedecedentandt hedi st ri but i on ofhi sestat e. Bl andi na and herchi l dren assi gned as one oft he er r orsal l egedl y commi t t ed by t he t r i al c our tt he ci r cumst ance t hat t he case was deci dedwi t houtaheari ng,i n vi ol ati on ofSec.1,Rul e90,oft heRul es ofCourt ,whi chprovi desthati ft herei sacont rover sybef oret hecourt as t o who ar et he l awf ulhei r s oft he deceas ed per son oras t ot he di st ri but i vesharest owhi ch each person i sent i t l edundert hel aw,t he cont r over syshal lbeheardanddeci dedasi nordi narycases
Di sposi t i ve :CFIdec i si on REVERSED and SET ASI DE,i nsof aras i t ordersTi rs ot oreconveyt oMi l agrosthepr opert i esenumerat edi n sai d deci si on.The same i s AFFI RMED,i nsof aras i tdeni esany r i ghtof Mi l agrost oaccount i ng.Theacti on f orpart i t i on oft hefishpondmustbe GI VENDUE COURSE.
No.59 -G. R.No.124862 December 22,1998FE
D.
QUITA,
pet i t i oner , vs. COURT OF APPEALS and BLANDI NA DANDAN, * respondents.
FE D.QUI TA andArt ur oT.Padl an,bothFi l i pi nos,wer emarr i edi nt he Phi l i ppi nes on 18 May 1941. They wer e not howev er bl es se d wi t h chi l dr en. Somewher e al ong t he way t hei r r el at i onshi p sour ed. Event ual l yFesued Art ur of ordi vor cei n San Franci sco,Cal i f orni a, U. S. A.She submi t t ed i nt he di vor ce procee di ngs a pri vat e wri t i ng dat ed19Jul y1950evi denci ngthei ragreementt ol i veseparat el yf r om each ot herand a set t l ementoft hei rconj ugalpropert i es.On 23 Jul y 1954 she obt ai ned a final j udgment of di vo r ce . Thre e( 3) wee ks t her eaf t ershemarri ed acert ai n Fel i xTupazi nt hesamel ocal i t ybut
dt hi scase be r emanded t othe l owercourtf orf urt her I SSUE:Shoul proceedi ngs?Pet i t i oneri nsi st sthatt herei snoneed because,first ,no l egalorf act uali ssueobtai nsf orresol ut i on ei t herast othehei rshi pof t hePadl an chi l dre norast othedecedent ;and,second,t hei ssueast o whobet weenpet i t i onerandpr i vat er espondenti st hepr operhei roft he decedenti soneofl aw whi ch can be r esol ved i nt hepre sentpet i t i on 67
based on est abl i sh f act s and admi ssi ons oft he par t i es.We cannot sust ai n peti t i oner .The provi si on r el i ed upon by r espondentcourti s cl ear:I ft her ei sa cont rov ersybef oret hecourtastowhoar e t he l awf ul hei rs of t he deceased person or as t o t he di st ri but i ve shares t o whi ch each person i s ent i t l ed under t he l aw, t he cont rov ersyshal lbeheardanddeci dedasi nordi narycases.
l ower court perf unct ori l y set t l ed her cl ai m i n her f avor by mer el y appl yi ng t he r ul i ng i n Te nchavez v . Esc año. Then i n pri vat e r espondent ' s mot i on t osetasi deand/orr econsi dert hel owerc ourt ' s deci si on shest ressedt hattheci t i zenshi pofpeti t i onerwasrel evanti n t hel i ghtoft herul i ngi n Van Dorn v.Romi l l o Jr .13 t hatal i ensmay obtai n di vor cesabr oad,whi ch may be r ecogni zed i nt hePhi l i ppi nes, provi ded t heyar eval i d accordi ng t ot hei rnat i onall aw..Wededuce t hatt he findi ng on t hei rci t i zenshi p pert ai ned sol el yt ot he t i me of t hei rmarr i age as t he t ri alcourtwas notsuppl i ed wi t h a basi st o det ermi nepet i t i oner' sci t i zenshi patt heti meoft hei rdi vorce.
Rul i ng:Weagreewi t hpet i t i onert hatnodi sput eexi st sei t herast othe
ri ght of t he si x( 6) Padl an chi l dren t oi nher i tf r om t he decedent because t her e ar epr oof st hatt hey have been dul y acknowl edged by hi m and pet i t i onerher sel fe ven r ecogni zest hem as hei r s ofArt ur o Padl an; 10 nor as t o t hei rr es pect i ve her edi t ary shar es . But cont r over sy r emai ns as t o who i st he l egi t i mat e survi vi ng spouseof Ar t ur o.Thet r i alcour t ,af t ert hepar t i esot hert han pet i t i onerf ai l edt o appear dur i ng t he sc hedul ed hear i ng on 23 Oct ober 1987 oft he mot i on f ori mmedi at e decl arat i on ofhei rsand di st ri but i on ofest at e, si mpl yi ssuedan orderr equi ri ngthesubmi ssi onoft herecor dsofbi rt h oft hePadl an chi l dren wi t hi nt en ( 10)daysf rom recei ptt hereof ,af t er whi ch,wi t h orwi t houtt he docume nt s,t he i ssue on decl ar at i on of hei r swoul d be deemed submi t t ed f orr esol ut i on.Wenot et hati n her comment t o pet i t i oner ' s mot i on pri vat er espondent r ai sed, among others,t hei ssueas t owhet herpet i t i onerwas st i l lent i t l ed t oi nheri t f r om t hedecedentconsi deri ngthatshe had secureda di vor cei nt he U. S. A.and i nf acthad t wi cere marr i ed.Sheal soi nvoked t heabove quot edproceduralrul e.11Tothi s,pet i t i onerr epl i edt hatArt urowasa Fi l i pi noand as such remai ned l egal l ymarri ed t oheri n spi t eoft he di vo r ce t hat t hey obt ai ned. 12 Readi ng bet wee n t he l i nes, t he i mpl i cati on i st hatpet i t i onerwas no l ongera Fi l i pi no ci t i zen atthe t i meofherdi vor cef r om Art ur o.Thi sshoul d havepr ompt ed t hetr i al courtt oconductaheari ngtoest abl i shherci t i zenshi p.Thepurposeof aheari ngi st oascert ai nt het rut hoft hematt ersi ni ssuewi t ht heai d ofdocumentaryand t est i moni alevi denceaswel last heargument sof t he part i es ei t hersupport i ng oropposi ng t he evi dence.I nst ead,t he
#60-Emi l i oPaci ol esv.Mi guel aChuatocoChi ng
Facts:
1. Mi guel i t a di ed i nt es t at e. She was surv i ve d by her husband ( pet i t i oner)andt womi norchi l dren. 2.Emi l i ofil edaveri fiedpet i t i on f orthesett l ementofMi guel i t a’ sest ate. 3.Mi guel i t a’ smotherfil edan opposi t i on t othepet i t i on f ori ssuanceof l et t er sofadmi ni st rat i on.Thatt hebul k oft heestat ei scomposed of paraphernalpropert i es.Shewi shedtobeappoi nt ed.Sheal sosai dthat shehasdi r ectandmat eri ali nt er esti nt heest at ebecauseshegavehal f ofher i nher i t ed propert i es t ot he deceased on condi t i on t hatthey woul dunder t akeabusi nessendeavoraspar t ner s. 4.Themot heras kedt hatoneEmmanuelbeappoi nt ed. 5.Courtappoi nt edEmi l i oandEmmanuelasj oi nt admi ni st r at or . 6. No 68
cl ai ms wer e fil ed. Ther eaf t er , Emi l i o fil ed an
i nvent ory. Emmanuelf ai l edtofil eone.
notbei ncl udedi nt hei nvent oryofest atepropert i es,t heprobat ecourt maypassupon t heti t l etheret o,butsuch det ermi nat i on i sprovi si onal , notconcl usi ve,andi ssubj ectt othefinaldeci si on i naseparateacti on t or es ol v et i t l e
7.Courtdecl aredEmi l i oandhi schi l drenast heonl ycompul soryhei rs oft hedeceased 8.Emi l i ot hen pet i t i oned t he courtf orthe paymentofe st at et ax andt hepart i t i on anddi st ri but i onoft heestat e.
2.Rel i ancet oPast orv .CA a. The Court ofAppeal sr el i ed heavi l y on t he above pri nci pl ei n sust ai ni ngthej uri sdi ct i on oft hei nt est atecourtt oconductaheari ng on respondent ’ scl ai m.Suchrel i ancei smi spl aced.
9.RTC deni ed t hepet i t i on as t ot hepart i t i on and di st ri but i on.CA affir med. Issue: Maya t ri alcourt ,act i ngasan i nt est at ecourt ,hearand pass
b.Undert hesai dpr i nci pl e,t hekeyconsi der at i on i st hatt hepur pose of t he i nt es t at e or pr obat e court i n heari ng and passi ng upon ques t i ons of owner shi pi s mer el yt o det er mi ne whet her or not a propert y shoul d bei ncl uded i nt hei nvent ory.Thef actsoft hi scase show t hatsuchwasnott hepurposeoft hei nt est atecourt .
upon quest i onsofowner shi pi nvol vi ngpropert i escl ai medt obepartof t hedecedent ’ sest ate? Hel d:
1.GeneralRul e:
i .Fi rst ,thei nvent orywasnotdi sput ed.
a.j uri sdi ct i on oft he t ri alcourtei t heras an i nt est ateora probat e courtr el at esonl ytomatt ershavi ngt odowi t ht heset t l ementoft he est at eand pr obateofwi l lofdeceased personsbutdoesnotext end t o t he det er mi nat i on of quest i ons of owner shi pt hat ari se duri ng t he pr oceedi ngs.
Respondentc oul d haveopposed pet i t i oner ’ si nvent oryand soughtt he excl usi on oft hespeci ficpropert i eswhi chshebel i evedorconsi deredt o beher s.Buti nst eadofdoi ngso,sheexpr essl yadopt edt hei nvent ory , t aki ng except i on onl yt ot he l ow val uati on pl aced on t he r eales t at e properties.
i .Thepatentrati onal ef orthi srul ei sthatsuch courtexerci sesspeci al andl i mi t edj uri sdi cti on.
i i .Second,Emmanuel( r espondent ’ sson)di dnotfil eani nventory 1.Hecoul d havesubmi t t ed an i nvent ory ,excl udi ngthere f r om t hose propert i eswhi ch r espondentconsi deredt o be her s.Thef actt hathe di d not endeav or t o submi t one shows t hat he acqui es ce d wi t h pe t i t i o ne r ’ si nv e nt o ry .
b.A wel l r ecogni zed devi ati on t ot he rul ei st he pri nci pl et hatan i nt es t at e or a probat e cour t may hear and pass upon ques t i ons of owner shi pwheni t spurposei st odet ermi newhet herornotapr opert y shoul dbei ncl udedi nt hei nvent oryi .Pastorv.CA
2.Cl earl y,t heRTC,act i ngasan i nt est at ecourt ,had over st epped i t s j ur i sdi ct i on.I t spr opercour seshoul dhavebeen t omai nt ai n ahandsoff st ance on t he mat t er .I ti s wel l - set t l ed i nt hi sj uri sdi ct i on, sanct i oned and r ei t er at ed i n al ong l i ne ofdeci si ons,t hatwhen a
1.As a r ul e,t he ques t i on ofowners hi pi s an ext r at aneous mat t er whi ch t he pr obat e cour tcannotr esol ve wi t h final i t y .Thus,f or t he purposeofdet ermi ni ngwhet heracert ai n propert yshoul d orshoul d 69
quest i on ari sesastoownershi pofpr opert yal l egedt obeapartoft he est at eoft hedeceasedper son,butcl ai medbysomeot herper sont obe hi s propert y , not by vi rt ue of any ri ght of i nheri t ance f r om t he deceased butbyti t l eadver set othatoft hedeceased and hi sest at e, such quest i on cannotbedet ermi ned i nt hecour seofan i nt est at eor probat eproceedi ngs.Thei nt est ateorprobatecourthasnoj uri sdi ct i on t oadj udi cat esuchcont enti ons,whi chmustbesubmi t t edtot hecourt i nt hee xe r c i s eofi t sg e ne r alj ur i s di c t i o n asar e gi o nalt r i alc our t .
accountoft hepl ai nt i fft hesum ofP5098,wi t hl egali nt erestandcost s, t hepl ai nt i fft osecuredamagesi nt heamountofP10, 000moreorl ess, andt hedef endantt obeabsol vedt ot al l yf r om t heamendedcompl ai nt . As i ti s conceded t hat t he pl ai nt i ff has al r eady r ecei ved t he sum r epres ente d by t he Uni t ed St at es t r easury , warr ant , whi ch i si n quest i on,t he appealwi l lt hus det er mi ne t he amount ,i fany,whi ch shoul dbepai dt othepl ai nt i ff bythedef endant . Thepar t i est ot hecasear ePaul i noGul l asand t hePhi l i ppi neNat i onal Bank.Thefir stnamedi sa memberoft hePhi l i ppi neBar ,r esi denti n t heCi t yofCebu.Theseco nd namedi sa banki ngcor porat i on wi t ha br anch i nt hesameci t y .At t or neyGul l ashashad a cur r entaccount wi t ht hebank.
a.Juri sprudencest ate sthat : i .pr obat e courtorone i n char ge ofpr oceedi ngs whet hert est at e or i nt est atecannotadj udi cateordet ermi neti t l etopropert i escl ai med t o be a par toft he est at e and whi ch ar e cl ai me dt o bel ong t o out si de parti es.Al lthatt hesai dcourtcoul ddoasregardssai dpropert i esi st o det er mi ne whet her they shoul d or shoul d not be i ncl uded i nt he i nvent oryorl i stofproperti estobeadmi ni st eredbyt headmi ni st rat or . I ft herei snodi sput e,wel land good,buti ft herei s,t hen t hepart i es, t he admi ni st r at or , and t he opposi ng part i es have t or esor tt o an ordi nary acti on f ora finaldet ermi nati on oft heconfli ct i ngcl ai msof t i t l ebecauset hepr obat ecourtcannotdoso.
I tappearsf r om t her ecordthatonAugust2,1933,t heTreasur eroft he Uni t edSt at esf ort heUni t edSt at esVet er ansBur eau i ssued aWarr ant i n t he amount of $361, pay abl e t o t he or der of Franci sc o Sabect ori aBacos.Paul i noGul l asand Pedr oLopezsi gned asendor ser s oft hi s check.Ther eupon i twas cashed by t he Phi l i ppi ne Nat i onal Bank. Subsequent l yt he t r eas ur y war r ant was di shonore d by t he I nsul arTreasurer .
3.Hence,re spondent ’ srecours ei st ofil easeparat eacti onwi t hacourt ofgeneralj uri sdi cti on.Thei nt estatecourti snott heappropri atef orum f orthe re sol ut i on ofheradver secl ai m ofowners hi p overpr opert i es ostensi bl ybel ongi ngtoMi guel i t a' sestate
#
61
-
Att hatt i met heout st andi ngbal anceofAt t or neyGul l ason t hebooks oft he bank was P509.Agai nstt hi sbal ancehehad i ssued cer t ai n chee kswhi chcoul d notbepai d when t he moneywasse quest er edby t heOnAugust20,1933,At t orneyGul l asl ef thi sresi dencef orMani l a. The bank on l ear ni ng oft he di shonoroft he t r easur y war r antsent not i cesby mai lt oMr .Gul l aswhi ch coul d notbe del i ver ed t ohi m at t hatt i mebecausehewasi n Mani l a.I nt hebank' sl et t erofAugust21, 1933,address edtoMessr s.Paul i noGul l aand Pedr oLopez,t heywer e i nf ormed t hatt heUni t ed Stat esTre asurywarr antNo.20175 i nt he nameofFr anci scoSabect ori aBacosf or$361orP722,t hepaymentf or whi ch had been r ecei ved hasbeen r et ur ned byourMani l aofficewi t h t henot at i on t hatt hepaymentofhi scheck hasbeen st opped by t he
PAULI NOGULLAS,
vs. THE PHI LI PPI NE NATI ONALBANK
Bot h part i est ot hi scase appeal ed f r om a j udgmentoft heCour tof Fi rs tI nst anceofCebu,whi chsent encedthedef endantt oret urntot he 70
I nsul ar Tre asur er ." I n vi ew of t hi st her ef or e we have appl i ed t he out st andi ng bal ancesofy ourcurr entaccount s wi t h us t ot he part paymentoft hef ore goi ngcheck" ,namel y,Mr .Paul i noGul l asP509.On t here t urnofAt t orneyGul l ast oCebu on August31,1933,not i ceof di shonorwas r ece i ve d and t he unpai d bal anceoft he Uni t ed Stat es Tr easur ywar r antwasi mmedi at el ypai dbyhi m.
i ndors erandt hatt heri ghtofacti on agai nsthi m doesnotaccrueunt i l t he not i ce i s gi ven.( Asi a Banki ng Corporat i onvs.Javi er[ 1923]44 Phi l . ,777;5Uni f orm LawsAnnot at ed. ) Asa gener alr ul e,a bank hasar i ghtofsetoff oft hedeposi t si ni t s hands f ort he paymentofany i ndebt ednesst oi ton t he partofa deposi t or .I n Loui si ana,however ,a ci vi ll aw j uri sdi ct i on,t he rul ei s deni ed,and i ti shel dt hatabankhasnori ght ,wi t houtan orderf r om or speci al assent of t he deposi t or to ret ai n out of hi s deposi t an amountsuffici entt omeethi si ndebt edness.Thebasi soft heLoui si ana doctr i nei sthe t heory ofconfident i alcont ract sari si ngf rom i rr egul ar deposi t s, he deposi tofmoneywi t h a banker .Wi t hf r eedom of e .g. ,t sel ect i on and af t erf ul lpref er ence t ot he mi nori t y rul e as morei n harmonywi t hmoder nbanki ngpract i ce.
As a consequence oft hese happeni ngs,t wo occur r ences t r anspi r ed whi ch i nconveni enced At t or ney Gul l as.I nt he fir stpl ace,as above i ndi cat ed, checks i ncl udi ng one f or hi si nsur ance wer e not pai d becauseoft hel ackoff undsst andi ngt ohi scr edi ti nt hebank.I nt he second pl ace,peri odi cal si nt hevi ci ni t ygave promi nencetot henews t othegreatmort i ficati on ofGul l as. l awphi l . ne t A var i et y ofi nci dent alquest i ons have been suggest ed on t he r ecor d whi chi tcanbet akenf orgr ant edashavi ngbeenadver sel ydi sposedof i nt hi sopi ni on.Themai ni ssuesar etwo,namel y,( 1)ast otheri ghtof Phi l i ppi ne Nat i onal Bank, and t o appl y a deposi tt ot he debt of deposi t ort othebankand( 2)ast otheamountdamages,i fany,whi ch shoul dbeawar dedGul l as.
St art i ng,t heref ore,f rom t hepremi sethatt hePhi l i ppi neNati onalBank had wi t hr espectt ot he deposi tofGul l as a ri ghtofsetoff,wenext consi deri ft hatremedy was enf orced proper l y.Thef actwebel i evei s undeni abl ethatpri ort othemai l i ngofnot i ceofdi shonor ,andwi t hout wai t i ng f orany act i on by Gul l as,t he bank made use oft he money st andi ngi nhi saccountt omakegood f ort het r easurywarrant.Att hi s poi ntr ecal lt hatGul l aswasmer el yan i ndorserandhadi ssuedi ngood f ai t h.
The Ci vi lCode cont ai ns pr ovi si ons r egar di ng compensat i on ( setoff) and deposi t .( Art i cl es 1195et seq. , 1758et seq T t i ons of . he por Phi l i ppi nel aw provi de t hatcompensat i on shal lt ake pl acewhen t wo personsarer eci procal l ycredi t orand debt orofeach other( Ci vi lCode, art i cl e 1195) .I n hi s connect i on,i thas been hel dt hatthe r el ati on exi st i ngbet weenadeposi t orandabanki st hatofcr edi t oranddebtor
Ast oadeposi t orwhohasf undssuffici entt ome etpayme ntofacheck drawn byhi mi nf avorofathi rdpart y,i thasbeen hel dt hathehasa ri ghtofacti on agai nstt hebank f ori t sref usalt opaysuch acheck i n t heabsenceofnot i cet ohi mt hatt hebank hasappl i edthef unds so deposi t ed i n ext i ngui shmentofpastdue cl ai ms hel d agai nsthi m.
TheNegot i abl eI nst r ume nt sLaw cont ai nspr ovi si onsest abl i shi ng t he l i abi l i t yofagenerali ndorserand gi vi ngtheproceduref ora not i ceof di shonor .Thegenerali ndorserofnegoti abl ei nst rumentengagest hati f hebedi shonor edand t he,necess arypr oceedi ngsofdi shonorbedul y t aken, he wi l l pay t he amount t her eof t ot he hol der .( Negot i abl e I nst rument sLaw,sec.66. )I nt hi sconnect i on,i thasbeen hel d al ong l i ne ofaut hori t i es t hatnot i ce ofdi shonor i si n order t o charge al l
( Cal l ahanv 1904] ,2Ann.Cas. ,203. )Thedeci si on s .BankofAnderson[ ci t ed represent sthemi nori t ydoctr i ne,f oron pri nci pl ei twoul d seem t hatnoti cei snotnecessaryt oamakerbecauset heri ghti sbased on t he doct ri ne t hat the rel at i onshi pi st hat of cr edi t or and debt or . Howevert hi smaybe,astoan i ndorsert hesi t uat i on i sdi ffer ent ,and not i ceshoul d act ual l y havebeen gi ve n hi m i n or dert hathe mi ght 71
pr o t e c thi si nt e r e s t s .
ci pal i t y ofSan Pedr o,Laguna fil ed i nt he CFIa FACTS:The Muni pet i t i on cl ai mi ngt heHaci endadeSan Pedr oTunasan bytheri ghtof Escheat .Col egi odeSan Jose,cl ai mi ngt obet heexcl usi veowneroft he sai dhaci enda,assai l edt hepet i t i on upon t hegroundst hatt hepet i t i on doesnotal l egesuffici entf act stoent i t l ethe appl i cant stother emedy prayedf or .Carl osYoung,cl ai mi ngt obeal esseeoft hehaci endaunder acont ractl egal l yent eredwi t hCoel egi odeSan Jose,al soi nt ervenedi n t he case .Muni ci palCounci lofSan Pedro,Laguna obj ect ed t ot he appear ance and i nt er ve nt i on ofCdSJ and Car l os Young but s uch obj ect i on was over rul ed.Furt hermoret hel owercourtdi smi ssed t he peti t i onfil edf orbyMuni ci palCounci lofSan Pedro.
Weaccor di ngl y ar e oft he opi ni on t hatt he act i on oft he bank was prej udi ci alt o Gul l as.Butt of ol l ow up t hatst at ement wi t h ot her s provi ngexactdamagesi snotsoeasy.Fori nst ance,f oral l egedl i bel ous art i cl est hebankwoul dnotbepri mari l yl i abl e.Thesamer emarkcoul d bemader el at i vet ot hel ossofbusi nesswhi chGul l ascl ai msbutwhi ch coul d notbetr aced defini t el ytothi soccurr ence.Al soGul l as havi ng eventual l y been r ei mbursedl ostl i t t l et hr ough t heactuall evyby t he bankon hi sf unds.On t heot herhand,i twasnotagr eeabl ef oronet o draw checksi nal lgoodf ai t h,t hen,l eavef orMani l a,andonre t urnfind t hatt hosecheckshad notbeen cashedbecauseoft heact i on t aken by t he bank.Thatcaused a di st ur bancei n Gul l as'finances,especi al l y wi t hr ef er encet ohi si nsur ance,whi ch wasi nj ur i oust ohi m.Al lf act s and ci r cumst ances consi der ed, we ar e of t he opi ni on t hat Gul l as shoul dbeawar ded nomi naldamagesbec auseoft hepr emat ur eact i on oft hebank agai nstwhi ch Gul l ashad no means ofpro t ect i on,and havefinal l ydet er mi nedt hatt heamountshoul dbeP250.
I SSUE: W/N t hepet i t i onf oresc heat sshoul dbedi smi ssed?
YES.Accor di ngt oSec.750 oft heCodeofCi vi lProcedur e RULI NG: Agr eeabl et ot hef or egoi ng,t heer r or sassi gned by t hepar t i eswi l li n t hemai n be overr ul ed,wi t ht heresul tt hatt hej udgmentoft het ri al courtwi l lbemodi fied bysent enci ngthedef endantt opaythepl ai nt i ff t hesum ofP250,andt hecost sofbothi nst ances.
( now Sec1 ofRul e91) ,t heessent i alf actswhi ch shoul dbeal l egedi n t hepet i t i on,whi ch arej uri sdi ct i onalbecauset heyconf erj uri sdi ct i on upon t heCFIare : 1.Thatapersondi edi nt est ateorwi t houtl eavi nganywi l l , 2.Thathe hasl ef tr ealorper sonalpr opert y and hewas t heowner t he r e of ,
RULE91
3.Thathe has notl ef tany hei ror per son by l aw ent i t l ed t ot he propert y,and No. 62 - MUNI CI PAL COUNCI L OF SAN PEDRO, LAGUNA V.
4.Thatt heonewhoappl i esf ort heescheati st hemuni ci pal i t ywher e deceasedhashi sl astres i denceori ncaseheshoul dhavenoresi dence i nt hecount ry,t hemuni ci pal i t ywheret hepropert yi ssi t uated.
COLEGI O DE SAN JOSE
72
The Muni ci palbase i t sr i ghtt o escheaton t he f actt hatt he Haci enda de San PedroTunasan,t emporalproper t yoft he Fat herof t he Soci et y ofJes us,wer e confiscat ed by t he or deroft he Ki ng of Spai n.From t hemomenti twasconfiscat ed,i tbecamet heproper t yof t hecommonweal t hoft hePhi l i ppi nes.Gi vent hi sf act,i ti sevi dentt hat t heMuni ci pal i t ycannotcl ai mt hatt hesamebeescheate dt othem,i f t he courtfinds t hatt he deceas ed i si nf actt he ownerofr ealand personalpropert ysi t uat edi nt hecount ryandhasnotl ef tanyhei ror otherpersonent i t l edt heret o,i tmayorder ,af t erpaymentofdebt sand otherl egalexpenses,t heescheatandi n such case,i tshal ladj udi cate t heper sonalpropert ytot hemuni ci pal i t ywher ethedeceasedhad hi s l astresi denceandtherealpropert yt othemuni ci pal i t y/i eswheret hey aresi t uated.
Sec.751 ( now Sec3 ofRul e91)prov i des t hataf t ert hepubl i cat i ons and t ri al ,i ft hecourtfinds t hatt hedeceased i si nf actt heownerof realandpersonalpr opert ysi t uat edi nt hecount ryandhasnotl ef tany hei rorotherperson ent i t l ed t heret o,i tmay order ,af t erpaymentof debtsandot herl egalexpenses,t heescheatandi n such case,i tshal l adj udi cat et he per sonal pr opert yt ot he muni ci pal i t y wher et he dece ase d had hi sl ast r es i dence and t he r eal pr oper t y t o t he muni ci pal i t y/i eswheret heyaresi t uated. Escheati sa procee di ngwher eby t herealand personalpr opert yofa decease d per son become t he pr opert y of t he Stat e upon hi s deat h wi t houtl eavi nganywi l lorl egalhei r s.I ti snotanor di nar yact i onbuta speci alprocee di ng.Thepr oceedi ngshoul dbecommencedbyapet i t i on andnotbyacompl ai nt .
Escheati sa procee di ngwher eby t herealand personalpr opert yofa decease d per son become t he pr opert y of t he St at e upon hi s deat h wi t houtl eavi nganywi l lorl egalhei r s.I ti snotanor di naryact i onbuta speci alproceedi ng.Thepr oceedi ngshoul dbecommencedbyapet i t i on andnotbyacompl ai nt.
I naspeci alpr oceedi ngf orEscheatundersect i on 750t o752( now sec 1 t o 3 ofRul e91) ,t he peti t i oneri s nott he sol eand excl usi ve i nt erest ed part y.Anyperson al l egi ngt ohaveadi rectri ghtorI nt erest i nt hepr opert y soughtt obeescheat ed i sl i kewi sean i nt er est ed and neces sarypart yandmayappearandopposet hepet i t i onf oresc heat .
I naspeci alpr oceedi ngf orEscheatundersect i on 750t o752 ( now sec1 t o 3 ofRul e 91) ,t he pet i t i oneri s nott he sol e and excl usi ve i nt erest ed party .Anyperson al l egi ngt ohaveadi rectri ghtorI nt erest i nt hepropert ysoughtt obeescheat ed i sl i kewi sean i nt er est ed and neces sarypart yandmayappearandopposet hepet i t i onf oresc heat .
When apet i t i on f orescheatdoesnotst at ef act swhi ch ent i t l et he pet i t i oner t o t he r emedy pr ay ed f or and ev en admi t t i ng t hem hypot het i cal l y,i ti s cl ear t hatthere i s no ground f or t he courtt o pr oceed t ot heI nqui si t i on provi ded by l aw,an i nt ere st edpart yshoul d notbedi sal l owedf rom fil i nga mot i on t odi smi ssthepet i t i on whi ch i s unt enabl ef r om al lst andpoi nt .And when t he mot i on t o di smi ssi s ent er t ai ned upon t hi s gr ound t he pet i t i on may be di smi ss ed uncondi t i onal l y.
Whenapet i t i onf orescheatdoesnotst at ef act swhi ch ent i t l et he pet i t i oner t o t he r emedy pr ay ed f or and ev en admi t t i ng t hem hypot het i cal l y,i ti s cl ear t hatthere i s no ground f or t he courtt o proceed t ot heI nqui si t i on provi ded byl aw,an i nt er est edpart yshoul d notbedi sal l owedf rom fil i nga mot i on t odi smi sst hepet i t i on whi ch i s unt enabl ef r om al lst andpoi nt .And when t he mot i on t o di smi ssi s ent er t ai ned upon t hi s gr ound t he pet i t i on may be di smi ss ed uncondi t i onal l y.
I nt hi scase,Col egi odeSan JoseandCarl osYounghadari ghtt o i nt ervene as an al l eged excl usi veownerand a l esseeoft hepr opert y r e s pe ct i v e l y . 73
