Rule 76 Case Digest Compilation

8/9/2019 Rule 76 Case Digest Compilation

1/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

CASE 1 - HEIRS OF THE LATE JESUS FRAN V. SALAS (1992)

FACTS:

Remedios Vda. de Tiosejo died and left a will bequeathin to he! "ollate!al !elati#es $b!othe!s% siste!s%ne&hews and nie"es' all he! &!o&e!ties and desinatin (esus )!an as e*e"uto!. )!an +le a &etition with,)I of ,ebu fo! &!obate of the will.

-!i#ate $Salas was the jude' !es&ondents $-R' who a!e siste!s of the de"eased +led a /ithd!awalof 0&&osition to the 1llowan"e of -!obate of the /ill whe!e the2 manifested that the2 ha#e noobje"tion o#e! the allowan"e of the will and o#e! the issuan"e of lette!s testamenta!2 to )!an.

In 3475% the &!obate "ou!t !ende!ed a de"ision admittin to &!obate the will and a&&ointin )!an ase*e"uto!. o "laim was &!esented aainst the estate. In 347% the "ou!t a&&!o#ed the -!oje"t of-a!tition.$0TE8 The followin alleations a!e not "!u"ial to the issue as the !ele#ant issue is /9E T0 )ILE. Iin"luded them fo! !e"it &u!&oses. :asi"all2% the S, fa#o!ed )!an;s "ontentions but also in the endsim&l2 !uled that the a"tion of -R is time of ,ou!t to !e"ei#e e#iden"e was !ead in o&en "ou!t@ -R Gandion"o sinedthe -a!tition and -R Es&ina submitted a "e!ti+"ation that she !e"ei#ed noti"e of hea!in the!efo!e andhas no obje"tion $b' the!e was an a"tual dist!ibution of the estate. To to& it all% -R;s "hild!en mo!taedthei! !es&e"ti#e sha!es in fa#o! of a ban>.

Res&ondent (ude $R(' de"la!ed the will #oid +ndin that the sinatu!e of Remedios was a fo!e!2and !eo&ened the &!o"eedins. This was issued befo!e the !est!ainin o!de! a&&lied b2 )!an f!om theS, was se!#ed on R(.

-R Gandion"o +led an aAda#it admittin that she !e"ei#ed noti"e of hea!in and he! sha!e of theestate and that she sined the 0mnibus =otion without !eadin it and that she wished to withd!aw he!&a!ti"i&ation in the 0mnibus =otion and in the 0&&osition% onl2 to withd!aw su"h th!ouh a (oint=anifestation with -R Es&ina.

9owe#e!% -R Gandiono aain +led a se"ond aAda#it "onfessin that she sined the (oint=anifestation onl2 u&on -R Es&ina;s !equest.

ISSUE / HELD

/B &!i#ate !es&ondents; 0mnibus =otion fo! Re"onside!ation "an &!os&e!C0RATIOThe followin "ou!ses of a"tion a!e o&en to an a!ie#ed &a!t2 to set aside o! atta"> the #alidit2 of a+nal judment8

$3'-etition fo! Relief unde! Rule if the Rules of ,ou!t whi"h must be +led within 6 da2s afte!lea!nin of the de"ision% but not mo!e than 6 months afte! su"h de"ision is ente!ed@

3 F S & e " - ! o , a s e D i e s t , o m & i l a t i o n R u l e 7 6


2/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

$5':2 di!e"t a"tion% #ia a s&e"ial "i#il a"tion fo! "e!tio!a!i @ o! b2 "ollate!al atta">% assumin that thede"ision is #oid fo! want of ju!isdi"tion@

$':2 an inde&endent "i#il a"tion unde! 1!t. 333 of the ,,% assumnin that the de"ision was obtainedth!ouh fa!ud and Rule "annot be a&&lied.

-R had lost thei! !iht to +le a &etition fo! !elief f!om judment% it a&&ea!in that thei! omnibus

motion fo! !e"onside!ation was +led e*a"tl2 6 2ea!s 3 months and 55 da2s afte! the !endition of thede"ision% and 6 2ea!s 3 month and 3 da2s afte! the a&&!o#al of the -!oje"t of -a!tition to whi"h the2#olunta!il2 e*&!essed thei! "onfo!mit2 th!ouh thei! !es&e"ti#e "e!ti+"ations% and "losin the testate&!o"eedins.

-R did not a#ail of the othe! 5 modes of atta">.

The &!obate judment of o#embe! 3475% lon +nal and undistu!bed b2 an2 attem&t to unsettle it%had &assed be2ond the !ea"h of the "ou!t.

The de"!ee of &!obate is "on"lusi#e u&on the due e*e"ution of the will and it "annot be im&uned onan2 of the !ounds autho!i?ed b2 law% e*"e&t that of f!aud% in an2 se&a!ate o! inde&endent a"tion o!&!o"eedin.

0the! matte!s8The -!oje"t of -a!tition was sined b2 -R Gandion"o &!o#in it had a"tual >nowlede the!eof.

-R we!e &!esent when the o!de! autho!i?in the ,le!> of ,ou!t to !e"ei#e e#iden"e was !ead in "ou!t.The ,le!> of ,ou!t "an !e"ei#e e#iden"e as laid down b2 ju!is&!uden"e% and it is not ne"essa!2 fo! the,le!> to ta>e an oath.It is not ne"essa!2 that the o!iinal of the will be atta"hed% as "lea! f!om the Rules of ,ou!t. Gi#enthis% it is found that a "o&2 of the o!iinal will was atta"hed in the &etition and it is not dis&uted thatthe o!iinal of the will was submitted in e#iden"e.The a#ailabilit2 of the will sin"e 3475 fo! -R;s e*amination !ende!s "om&letel2 baseless thei! "laim off!aud on )!an;s &a!t. 1ssumin a!uendo that the!e was f!aud% su"h f!aud is not of the >ind whi"h&!o#ides a suA"ient justi+"ation fo! a =otion fo! !e"onside!ation o! a -etition fo! Relief f!om (udment.Su"h f!aud must be e*t!insi" o! "ollate!al to the matte!s in#ol#ed. -etition !anted

CASE 4 - G.R. No. 77047 !" 2#$ 19##

JOA%UINA R-INFANTE DE ARAN&$ ANTONIO R-INFANTE$ CARLOS R. INFANTE$ ERCEDES R-

INFANTE DE LEDNIC'$ ALFREDO R-INFANTE$ TERESITA R-INFANTE$ RAON R-INFANTE$

FLORENCIA R-INFANTE DE DIAS$ ARTIN R-INFANTE$ JOSE R-INFANTE LIN' !* JOA%UIN R-

INFANTE CA+,ELL$ &etitione!s%

#s.

THE HON. NICOLAS GALING$ +RESIDING JUDGE$ REGIONAL TRIAL COURT$ NATIONAL CA+ITAL

JUDICIAL REGION$ ,RANCH NO. 1$ +ASIG$ ETRO ANILA AND JOA%UIN R-

INFANTE$ !es&ondents.

F!: 0n =a!"h 346% &!i#ate !es&ondent +led with the Reional T!ial ,ou!t of -asi% :!an"h 366% a

&etition fo! the &!obate and allowan"e of the last will and testament of the late =ontse!!at R fo! th!ee $' "onse"uti#e wee>s. 0n the date of the hea!in% no

o&&osito! a&&ea!ed.



3/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

-!i#ate !es&ondent &!esented his e#iden"e ex-parte,du!in the &!o"eedins% &!i#ate !es&ondent was

a&&ointed e*e"uto!.

0n 3 =a2 346% &etitione!s +led a motion fo! !e"onside!ation of the o!de! of 35 =a2 346 allein

that% as named leatees% no noti"es we!e sent to them as !equi!ed b2 Se". % Rule 76 of the Rules of

,ou!t and the2 &!a2ed that the2 be i#en a &e!iod of ten $3' da2s within whi"h to +le thei! o&&osition

to the &!obate of the will.

The &!obate "ou!t denied the motion fo! !e"onside!ation.

I:

35 o5 o 65o! o8 o 65o! 65o*8; o 8

8 ! ?58*88o! 5@85 8 65o! o =8.

R8; : .

R!8o8

Se". % Rule 76 of the Rules of ,ou!t !eads8

SE,. . Heirs, devisees, legatees, and executors to be notifed by mail or personally. K

The "ou!t sha also "ause "o&ies of the noti"e of the time and &la"e +*ed fo! &!o#in

the will to be add!essed to the desinated o! othe! >nown hei!s% leatees% and

de#isees of the testato! !esident in the -hili&&ines at thei! &la"es of !esiden"e% and

de&osited in the &ost oA"e with the &ostae the!eon &!e&aid at least twent2 $5' da2s

befo!e the hea!in% if su"h &la"es of !esiden"e be >nown. 1 "o&2 of the noti"e must in

li>e manne! be mailed to the &e!son named as e*e"uto!% if he be not% the &etitione!@

also% to an2 &e!son named as "os in a news&a&e! of ene!al

"i!"ulation in the &!o#in"e.

RULE 7 - CASE B/

RODELAS VS ARAN&A

RELOVA$ J.

RULING: The &hotostati" o! *e!o* "o&2 of the lost o! dest!o2ed holo!a&hi" will ma2 be admitted

be"ause the authenti"it2 of the handw!itin of the de"eased "an be dete!mined b2 the &!obate "ou!t.

-u!suant to 1!ti"le 33 of the ,i#il ,ode% &!obate of holo!a&hi" wills is the allowan"e of the will b2 the

"ou!t afte! its due e*e"ution has been &!o#ed. The &!obate ma2 be un"ontested o! not. If un"ontested%

at least one Identif2in witness is !equi!ed and% if no witness is a#ailable% e*&e!ts ma2 be !eso!ted to. If

"ontested% at least th!ee Identif2in witnesses a!e !equi!ed. 9owe#e!% if the holo!a&hi" will has been

lost o! dest!o2ed and no othe! "o&2 is a#ailable% the will "annot be &!obated be"ause the best and onl2

F S & e " - ! o , a s e D i e s t , o m & i l a t i o n R u l e 7 6


4/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

e#iden"e is the handw!itin of the testato! in said will. It is ne"essa!2 that the!e be a "om&a!ison

between sam&le handw!itten statements of the testato! and the handw!itten will. :ut% a &hotostati"

"o&2 o! *e!o* "o&2 of the holo!a&hi" will ma2 be allowed be"ause "om&a!ison "an be made with the

standa!d w!itins of the testato!. In the "ase of Gam #s. a&% 3 -9IL. H4% the ,ou!t !uled that Jthe

e*e"ution and the "ontents of a lost o! dest!o2ed holo!a&hi" will ma2 not be &!o#ed b2 the ba!e

testimon2 of witnesses who ha#e seen andBo! !ead su"h will. The will itself must be &!esented@

othe!wise% it shall &!odu"e no eMe"t. The law !ea!ds the do"ument itself as mate!ial &!oof ofauthenti"it2.J :ut% in )ootnote of said de"ision% it sa2s that J-e!ha&s it ma2 be &!o#ed b2 a

&hoto!a&hi" o! &hotostati" "o&2. E#en a mimeo!a&hed o! "a!bon "o&2@ o! b2 othe! simila! means% if

an2% whe!eb2 the authenti"it2 of the handw!itin of the de"eased ma2 be e*hibited and tested befo!e

the &!obate "ou!t%J E#identl2% the &hotostati" o! *e!o* "o&2 of the lost o! dest!o2ed holo!a&hi" will

ma2 be admitted be"ause then the authenti"it2 of the handw!itin of the de"eased "an be dete!mined

b2 the &!obate "ou!t.

ISSUE8 /hethe! o! not a holo!a&hi" will whi"h was lost o! "annot be found "an be &!o#ed b2 means

of a &hotostati" "o&2.

HELD8 ES

FACTS8 1&&ellant +led a &etition with the ,)I of Ri?al fo! the &!obate of the holo!a&hi" will and the

issuan"e of lette!s testementa!2 in he! fa#o!. 0&&osito!


5/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

I !5 o +88o o A665o> 38 o Lo*;!58! J8!. FELI ,ALANA$ JR.>.HON. ANTONIO . ARTINE&$ J*; o Co5 o F85 I! o D!>!o$ ,5! VIAVELINA ,. ANTONIO !* DELIA ,. LANA,ANAQUINO, J!

F!:

Testato! Leodea!ia (ulian $(ulian' died at the ae of 67. She was su!#i#ed b2 he! husband and si*"hild!en. In he! will% she stated that8 $a' That she was the owne! of the Nsouthe!n halfO of 4 "onjuallots@ $b' That she was the absolute owne! of 5 &a!"els of land whi"h she inhe!ited f!om he! fathe!@ $"'That it was he! desi!e that he! &!o&e!ties should not be di#ided amon he! hei!s du!in he! husband;slifetime and that thei! leitimes should be satis+ed out of the f!uits of he! &!o&e!ties. $d' That afte! he!husband;s death% that he! &a!a&he!nal and all "onjual lands be di#ided in the manne! set fo!th in thewill.

In eMe"t% (ulian dis&osed of in he! will he! husband;s "onjual assets. 9e! son% )eli* :alana2% (!.$:alana2 (!.' +led a &etition fo! &!obate of the will. This was o&&osed b2 his fathe! $:alana2 S!.' and1#elina 1ntonio on the !ounds of la"> of testamenta!2 "a&a"it2% undue inPuen"e% and &!ete!ition.:alana2 S!. late! withd!ew this o&&osition th!ouh a N,onfo!mation of Di#ision and Renun"iation of9e!edita!2 RihtsO whe!ein he Nwai#ed and !enoun"edO his he!edita!2 !ihts in he! estate in fa#o! ofthei! si* "hild!en.

The &!obate of the will was fu!the! o&&osed b2 1tt2. =ontaQa $who &u!&o!ted to be a law2e! of :alana2(!.' and two othe!s% sa2in that the will was #oid be"ause it eMe"ted a "om&!omise on futu!e leitimesand that no noti"e to "!edito!s we!e issued. So% in its o!de! it dismissed the &etition fo! the &!obate%"on#e!ted the testate &!o"eedin into an intestate &!o"eedin% o!de!ed the issuan"e of a noti"e to"!edito!s and set the intestate &!o"eedin fo! hea!in.

I:3. /hethe! it was "o!!e"t to &ass u&on the int!insi" #alidit2 of the will befo!e !ulin on its allowan"e o!fo!mal #alidit2.

5. /hethe! the &!obate "ou!t was "o!!e"t in de"la!in that the will was #oid and in "on#e!tin thetestate &!o"eedin into an intestate &!o"eedin.

. /hethe! it was "o!!e"t to issue noti"e to "!edito!s without +!st a&&ointin an e*e"uto! o! !eula!

administ!ato!.

H*:3. ES. The &!obate "ou!t a"ted "o!!e"tl2 in &assin u&on the will;s int!insi" #alidit2 e#en befo!e itsfo!mal #alidit2 has been established. The &!obate of a will miht be"ome an idle "e!emon2 if on itsfa"e it a&&ea!s to be int!insi"all2 #oid. /he!e &!a"ti"al "onside!ations demand that the int!insi" #alidit2of the will be &assed u&on% e#en befo!e it is &!obated% the "ou!t should meet the issue.

5. 0. The will should ha#e been u&held% "onside!in that its alleed defe"ts ha#e been "u!ed b2 thehusband;s "onfo!mit2. The husband;s "onfo!mit2 had the eMe"t of #alidatin the will% without &!ejudi"eto the !ihts of "!edito!s and leitimes of "om&ulso!2 hei!s. The !ule is that the in#alidit2 of one ofse#e!al dis&ositions "ontained in a will does not !esult in the in#alidit2 of the othe! dis&ositions if the+!st in#alid dis&osition had not been made. 1n inte!&!etation that will !ende! a testamenta!2dis&osition o&e!ati#e ta>es &!e"eden"e o#e! a "onst!u"tion that will nullif2 a &!o#ision of the will. Thus%with !es&e"t to &!o#ision $a' abo#e% the illeal de"la!ation does not nullif2 the will. It ma2 be

dis!ea!ded. 1s to &!o#ision $"'% it would at most be eMe"ti#e onl2 f!omthe date of he! death unlessthe!e a!e "om&ellin !easons fo! te!minatin the "o


6/23


7/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

,ENEDICTO LEVISTE$ &etitione!%

#s.

THE COURT OF A++EALS$ HON. JUDGE LUIS ,. REES$ COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF

ANILA$ ROSA DEL ROSARIO$ RITA ,ANU$ CAREN DE GU&AN-AR%UE&$ JESUS R. DE

GU&AN$ RAON R. DE GU&AN$ JACINTO R. DE GU&AN !* ANTONIO R. DE

GU&AN$ !es&ondents.

FACTS:

-etitione!% a &!a"ti"in atto!ne2% ente!ed into a w!itten a!eement with the &!i#ate !es&ondent

Rosa del Rosa!io to a&&ea! as he! "ounsel in a &etition fo! &!obate of the holo!a&hi" will of the

late =a*ima ,. Resel#a. Unde! the will% a &ie"e of !eal &!o&e!t2 at Sales St!eet% uia&o% =anila%

was bequeathed to Del Rosa!io. It was a!eed that &etitione!s "ontient fee would be thi!t2% inte!est and 3 &e! "ent !o2alt2 in the Su!iao ,onsolidated =inin ,o.% In".% lo"ated at

Siano% Su!iao.

The Su!iao ,onsolidated =inin o&&osed the &!obate u&on the !ound of fo!e!2.

The lowe! "ou!t issued an o!de! admittin the dis&uted do"ument to &!obate. 9en"e% this

a&&eal b2 said ,om&an2.

:ution maintains that the lowe! "ou!t e!!ed in ente!tainin a&&ellant;s o&&osition and in not

dismissin its a&&eal.

ISSUE8 /B the a&&eal should ha#e been dismissed.

9ELD8 es. It is well


9/23


10/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

It is a well


11/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

item of &e!sonal o! !eal &!o&e!t2 he is "alled u&on to !e"ei#e $1!ti"le 75% ,i#il ,ode'. 1t theoutset% he a&&ea!s to ha#e an inte!est in the will as an hei!% de+ned unde! 1!ti"le 75 of the,i#il ,ode as a &e!son "alled to the su""ession eithe! b2 the &!o#ision of a will o! b2 o&e!ationof law. 9owe#e!% intesta"2 ha#in !esulted f!om the &!ete!ition of !es&ondent ado&ted "hildand the uni#e!sal institution of hei!s% &etitione! is in eMe"t not an hei! of the testato!. 9e hasno leal standin to &etition fo! the &!obate of the will left b2 the de"eased and S&e"ial-!o"eedins o. H43 1 CA

F!:

Senato! =a!iano (esus ,uen"o died on )ebu!2 5H% 346. 9e was su!#i#ed b2 his widow% the he!ein

&etitione! Rosa ,a2etano ,uen"o% and thei! two $5' mino! sons% =a!iano (esus% (!. and (esus Sal#ado!%

both su!named ,uen"o% all !esidin at ue?on ,it2% and b2 his "hild!en of the +!st ma!!iae%

!es&ondents he!ein% namel2% =anuel ,uen"o% Lou!des ,uen"o% ,on"e&"ion ,uen"o =anue!a% ,a!men

,uen"o% ,onsuelo ,uen"o Re2es and Te!esita ,uen"o Gon?ales% all of leal ae and !esidin in ,ebu.

0n (arc# ./0% !es&ondent Lou!des ,uen"o +led a -etition fo! Lette!s of 1dminist!ation with the

"ou!t of +!st instan"e $,)I' of ,ebu% allein amon othe! thins% that the late senato! died intestatein

=anila on 5H )eb!ua!2 346@ that he was a !esident of ,ebu at the time of his death@ and that he left!eal and &e!sonal &!o&e!ties in ,ebu and ue?on ,it2.

0n 1 (arc# ./0% &etitione! Rosa +led a &etition with the ,)I of ue?on ,it2 fo! theprobateof the

de"easeds last %ill and testamentand fo! the issuan"e of letters testamentaryin he! fa#o!% as the

su!#i#in widow and e*e"ut!i* in the said last will and testament.

9a#in lea!ned of the intestate &!o"eedin in the ,ebu "ou!t% &etitione! Rosa +led in said ,ebu "ou!t

an 0&&osition and =otion to Dismiss% dated 23 (arc# ./0% as well as an 0&&osition to -etition fo!

1&&ointment of S&e"ial 1dminist!ato!% dated 1&!il 346.

0n 3 April ./0% the ,ebu "ou!t issued an o!de! holdin in abe2an"e its !esolution on &etitione!s

motion to dismiss Juntil afte! the ,)I of ue?on ,it2 shall ha#e a"ted on the &etition fo!probateof that

do"ument &u!&o!tin to be the last will and testament of the de"eased Don =a!iano (esus ,uen"o.J

Su"h o!de! of the ,ebu "ou!t was neithe! e*"e&ted to no! souht b2 !es&ondents to be !e"onside!ed o!

set aside b2 the ,ebu "ou!t no! did the2 "hallene the same b2 certiorario! &!ohibition &!o"eedins in

the a&&ellate "ou!ts.

Instead% !es&ondents +led in the ue?on ,it2 "ou!t an 0&&osition and =otion to Dismiss% dated 3

April ./0% opposing probateof the will and assailin the ju!isdi"tion of the said ue?on ,it2 "ou!t to

ente!tain &etitione!s &etition fo! &!obate and fo! a&&ointment as e*e"ut!i* in #iew of the alleed

e*"lusi#e ju!isdi"tion #ested b2 he! &etition in the ,ebu "ou!t.

In its o!de! of April ./0% the ue?on ,it2 "ou!t denied the motion to dismiss% i#in as a &!in"i&al

!eason the J&!e"eden"e of &!obate &!o"eedin o#e! an intestate &!o"eedin.J The said "ou!t fu!the!

found in said o!de! that the residenceof the late senato! at the time of his death was at o. 64 -i 2=a!al% Sta. =esa 9eihts% Que4on 5ity.

Res&ondent Lou!dess motion fo! !e"onside!ation of the ue?on ,it2 "ou!ts said o!de! of 33 1&!il 346

asse!tin its e*"lusi#e ju!isdi"tion o#e! the &!obate &!o"eedin as defe!!ed to b2 the ,ebu "ou!t

was deniedon 16 April ./0and a se"ond motion fo! !e"onside!ation dated 13 (ay ./0was

li>ewise denied.



12/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

Instead of a&&ealin f!om the ue?on ,it2 "ou!ts o!de! admitting t#e %ill to probateand namin

&etitione!e

"oni?an"e of Lou!des intestate&etition whi"h would the!eb2 be shown to be $alse and improper% and

lea#e the exerciseof ju!isdi"tion to the Que4on 5ity court% to the e*"lusion of all othe! "ou!ts. Li>ewise

b2 its a"t of defe!en"e% the ,ebu "ou!t left it to the ue?on ,it2 "ou!t to !esol#e the question between



13/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

the &a!ties whethe! the de"edents residenceat the time of his death was in ue?on ,it2 whe!e he had

his con&ugal domicile!athe! than in ,ebu ,it2 as "laimed b2 !es&ondents. The ,ebu "ou!t thus

indi"ated that it would de"line to ta>e "oni?an"e of the intestate&etition befo!e it and instead defe!

to the ue?on ,it2 "ou!t% unlessthe latte! would ma>e a neati#e +ndin as to theprobate&etition

and the !esiden"e of the de"edent within its te!!ito!2 and #enue.

5. The !elati#el2 !e"ent "ase of Uriarte vs 5ourt o$ )irst Instance o$ Negros Occidental % the ,ou!tu&held the do"t!ine of &!e"eden"e of &!obate &!o"eedins o#e! intestate &!o"eedins in this wise8

It "an not be denied that a s&e"ial &!o"eedin intended to eMe"t the dist!ibution of the estate

of a de"eased &e!son% whethe! in a""o!dan"e with the law on intestate su""ession o! in

a""o!dan"e with his will% is a J&!obate matte!J o! a &!o"eedin fo! the settlement of his

estate. It is e*ually true, #o%ever, t#at in accordance %it# settled &urisprudence in t#is

&urisdiction, testate proceedings $or t#e settlement o$ t#e estate o$ a deceased person ta7e

precedence over intestate proceedings $or t#e same purpose "#us it #as been #eld repeatedly

t#at, i$ in t#e course o$ intestate proceedings pending be$ore a court o$ frst instance it is $ound

t#at t#e decedent #ad le$t a last %ill, proceedings $or t#e probate o$ t#e latter s#ould replace

t#e intestate proceedingse#en if at that state an administ!ato! had al!ead2 been a&&ointed%

the latte! bein !equi!ed to !ende! +nal a""ount and tu!n o#e! the estate in his &ossession to

the e*e"uto! subsequentl2 a&&ointed. "#is #o%ever, is understood to be %it#out pre&udice t#at

s#ould t#e alleged last %ill be re&ected or is disapproved, t#e proceeding s#all continue as an

intestacy As already adverted to, t#is is a clear indication t#at proceedings $or t#e probate o$

a %ill en&oy priority over intestate proceedings.

. /ith mo!e !eason should the ue?on ,it2 &!o"eedins be u&held when it is ta>en into "onside!ation

that Rule 76% se"tion 5 !equi!es that the &etition fo! allowan"e of a will must show8 J$a'

the&urisdictionalfa"ts.J Su"h Jju!isdi"tional fa"tsJ in &!obate &!o"eedins% as held b2 the ,ou!t

in )ernando vs 5risostomoJ a!e the death of the de"edent% his !esiden"e at the time of his death in the

&!o#in"e whe!e the &!obate "ou!t is sittin% o! if he is an inhabitant of a fo!ein "ount!2% his ha#in left

his estate in su"h &!o#in"e.J

This tallies with the established leal "on"e&t as !estated b2 =o!an that J$T'heprobateof a will is a&!o"eedin in rem. The noti"e b2 &ubli"ation as a &!e

t#ereo$ is conclusive as to its due execution and validity.J The ue?on ,it2 "ou!t a"ted !eula!l2 %it#in

its &urisdictionin admittin the de"edents last will to &!obate and namin &etitione! of ju!isdi"tion as &e! the a&&ellate "ou!ts a&&ealed de"ision.

1 - A8!o 5!*o >. S!o (19# C!)

Important points!

8I99:; 5ON59U:I; I> B "#e probate o$ a %ill by t#e probate court #aving &urisdiction t#ereo$ is considered asconclusive as to its due execution and validity, and is also conclusive t#at t#e testator %as o$ soundand disposing mind at t#e time %#en #e executed t#e %ill, and %as not acting under duress, menace,$raud, or undue inDuence, and t#at t#e %ill is genuine and not a $orgery



14/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

2 I>; I>; '@O5==>INE CIN @=(C B "#e probate o$ a %ill in t#is &urisdiction is a proceeding in rem"#e provision o$ notice by publication as a prere*uisite to t#e allo%ance o$ a %ill is constructive noticeto t#e %#ole %orld, and %#en probate is granted, t#e &udgment o$ t#e court is binding upon everybody,even against t#e :tate

0 I>; I>; 5ON59U:I; I>; 5@I(INA9 A5"ION AEAIN:" )O@E=@ O) A >U9F '@OA"=> 8I99 B Upon t#e $acts stated int#e opinion o$ t#e court, it %as #eld! "#at in vie% o$ t#e provisions o$ sections 23/, 222 and /1 o$ t#e5ode o$ 5ivil 'rocedure, criminal action %ill not lie in t#is &urisdiction against t#e $orger o$ a %ill %#ic##ad been duly admitted to probate by a court o$ competent &urisdiction

)1,TS8

0n =a2 5% 343% the &etitione! he!ein +led in the ,ou!t of )i!st Instan"e of -am&ana a &etition fo!the &!obate of the will of his de"eased wife% Ines :asa. /ithout an2 o&&osition% and u&on the testimon2of :enino ). Gabino% one of the attestin witnesses% the &!obate "ou!t% on (une 57% 343% admitted thewill to &!obate.

1lmost th!ee 2ea!s late!% on 1&!il 33% 34% the +#e inte!#eno!s he!ein mo#ed e* &a!te to !eo&en the&!o"eedins% allein la"> of ju!isdi"tion of the "ou!t to &!obate the will and to "lose the &!o"eedins.:e"ause +led e* &a!te% the motion was denied. The same motion was +led a se"ond time% but withnoti"e to the ad#e!se &a!t2. The motion was ne#e!theless denied b2 the &!obate "ou!t on =a2 5%34. 0n a&&eal to this "ou!t% the o!de! of denial was aA!med on (ul2 56% 34H. $:asa #. =e!"ado% oM. Ga?.% 5H53.'

It a&&ea!s that on 0"tobe! 57% 345% i. e.% si*teen months afte! the &!obate of the will of Ines :asa%inte!#eno! Rosa!io :asa de Leon +led with the justi"e of the &ea"e "ou!t of San )e!nando% -am&ana% a"om&laint aainst the &etitione! he!ein% fo! falsi+"ation o! fo!e!2 of the will &!obated as abo#eindi"ated. The &etitione! was a!!ested. 9e &ut u& a bond in the sum of -% and enaed these!#i"es of an atto!ne2 to unde!ta>e his defense. -!elimina!2 in#estiation of the "ase was "ontinuedtwi"e u&on &etition of the "om&lainant. The "om&laint was +nall2 dismissed% at the instan"e of the"om&lainant he!self% in an o!de! dated De"embe! % 345.

Th!ee months late!% o! on =a!"h 5% 34% the same inte!#eno! "ha!ed the &etition fo! the se"ond timewith the same oMense% &!esentin the "om&laint this time in the justi"e of the &ea"e "ou!t of =e*i"o%-am&ana. The &etitione! was aain a!!ested% aain &ut u& a bond in the sum of -%% and enaedthe se!#i"es of "ounsel to defend him. This se"ond "om&laint% afte! in#estiation% was also dismissed%aain at the instan"e of the "om&lainant he!self who alleed that the &etitione! was in &oo! health.That was on 1&!il 57% 34.

Some nine months late!% on )eb!ua!2 5% 34% to be e*a"t% the same inte!#eno! a""used the same&etitione! fo! the thi!d time of the same oMense. The info!mation was +led b2 the &!o#in"ial +s"al of

-am&ana in the justi"e of the &ea"e "ou!t of =e*i"o. The &etitione! was aain a!!ested% aain &ut u&a bond of -%% and enaed the se!#i"es of defense "ounsel. The "ase was dismissed on 1&!il 5%34% afte! due in#estiation% on the !ound that the will alleed to ha#e been falsi+ed had al!ead2been &!obated and the!e was no e#iden"e that the &etitione! had fo!ed the sinatu!e of the testat!i*a&&ea!in the!eon% but that% on the "ont!a!2% the e#iden"e satisfa"to!il2 established the authenti"it2 ofthe sinatu!e afo!esaid.

Dissatis+ed with the !esult% the &!o#in"ial +s"al% on =a2 4% 34% mo#ed in the ,ou!t of )i!st Instan"eof -am&ana fo! !ein#estiation of the "ase. The motion was !anted on =a2 5% 34% and% fo! thefou!th time% the &etitione! was a!!ested% +led a bond and enaed the se!#i"es of "ounsel to handle his



15/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

defense. The !ein#estiation d!aed on fo! almost a 2ea! until )eb!ua!2 3% 34% when the ,ou!t of)i!st Instan"e o!de!ed that the "ase be t!ied on the me!its.

The &etitione! inte!&osed a demu!!e! on o#embe! 5H% 34H% on the !ound that the will alleed toha#e been fo!ed had al!ead2 been &!obated. This demu!!e! was o#e!!uled on De"embe! 5% 34H%whe!eu&on an e*"e&tion was ta>en and a motion fo! !e"onside!ation and noti"e of a&&eal we!e +led.The motion fo! !e"onside!ation and the &!o&osed a&&eal we!e denied on (anua!2 3% 346.

The "ase &!o"eeded to t!ial% and fo!thwith &etitione! mo#ed to dismiss the "ase "laimin aain that thewill alleed to ha#e been fo!ed had al!ead2 been &!obated and% fu!the!% that the o!de! &!obatin thewill is "on"lusi#e as to the authenti"it2 and due e*e"ution the!eof.

The motion was o#e!!uled and the &etitione! +led with the ,ou!t of 1&&eals a &etitionfo! certiorariwith &!elimina!2 injun"tion to enjoin the t!ial "ou!t f!om fu!the! &!o"eedins in the matte!.The injun"tion was issued and the!eafte!% on (une 34% 347% the ,ou!t of 1&&eals denied the &etitionfo! certiorari% and dissol#ed the w!it of &!elimina!2 injun"tion. Th!ee justi"es dissented in a se&a!ateo&inion. The "ase is now befo!e this "ou!t fo! !e#iew on certiorari.

Issue8 /hethe! o! not the &!obate of the will of -etitione!;s de"eased wife is a ba! to his "!iminal&!ose"ution fo! the alleed fo!e!2 of the said will.

Rulin8

Se"tion 65H of the same ,ode is mo!e e*&li"it as to the "on"lusi#eness of the due e*e"ution of a&!obated will. It sa2s8SEC. 2B. Ao=! N!5"$ !* Co8> ! o E8o. No=8 ! 6! 85 5! o5 65o! !$ 8 8 65o>* !* !o=* 8 Co5 o F85 I!$ o5 " !66! o S65 Co5 !* !o=! " o5o ! =8 o 5! !* 65o! ! ! o8> ! o 8 * 8o. (E6!8o5.)

In =anahan #. =anahan $H -hil.% % H3'% we held8J. . . The de"!ee of &!obate is "on"lusi#e with!es&e"t to the due e*e"ution the!eof and it "annot be im&uned on an2 of the !ounds autho!i?ed b2law% e*"e&t that of f!aud% in an2 se&a!ate o! inde&endent a"tion o! &!o"eedinXO

In 5 R. ,. L.% &. 77% se"tion 7% it is said8jJThe &!obate of a will b2 the &!obate "ou!t ha#inju!isdi"tion the!eof is usuall2 "onside!ed as "on"lusi#e as to its due e*e"ution and #alidit2% and is also"on"lusi#e that the testato! was of sound and dis&osin mind at the time when he e*e"uted the will%and was not a"tin unde! du!ess% mena"e% f!aud% o! undue inPuen"e% and that the will is enuine andnot a fo!e!2.J $Em&hasis ou!s.'

1s ou! law on wills% &a!ti"ula!l2 se"tion 65H of ou! ,ode of ,i#il -!o"edu!e afo!equoted% was ta>enalmost bodil2 f!om the Statutes of Ve!mont% the de"isions of the Su&!eme ,ou!t of that State !elati#eto the eMe"t of the &!obate of a will a!e of &e!suasi#e autho!it2 in this ju!isdi"tion.

The &!obate of a will in this ju!isdi"tion is a &!o"eedin in !em. The &!o#ision of noti"e b2 &ubli"ation asa &!e!equisite to the allowan"e of a will is "onst!u"ti#e noti"e to the whole wo!ld% and when &!obate is!anted% the judment of the "ou!t is bindin u&on e#e!2bod2% e#en aainst the State. This "ou!t held

in the "ase of =analo #. -a!edes and -hili&&ine )ood ,o. $7 -hil.% 4'8

JThe &!o"eedin fo! the &!obate of a will is one in !em $ ,2".% 356H'% and the "ou!t a"qui!esju!isdi"tion o#e! all the &e!sons inte!ested% th!ouh the &ubli"ation of the noti"e &!es"!ibed b2 se"tion6 of the ,ode of ,i#il -!o"edu!e% and an2 o!de! that ma2 be ente!ed the!ein is bindin aainst all ofthem.

JTh!ouh the &ubli"ation of the &etition fo! the &!obate of the will% the "ou!t a"qui!es ju!isdi"tion o#e!all su"h &e!sons as a!e inte!ested in said will@ and an2 judment that ma2 be !ende!ed afte! said&!o"eedin is bindin aainst the wo!ld.J#i!tua3aw lib!a!2

3H F S & e " - ! o , a s e D i e s t , o m & i l a t i o n R u l e 7 6


16/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

Se"tion % &a!a!a&h % of the ,ode of ,i#il -!o"edu!e establishes an in"ont!o#e!tible &!esum&tion infa#o! of judments de"la!ed b2 it to be "on"lusi#e.lib!a!2

T =8 8 @8o !>8; 65o!* " ! o6 o5$ != =8 o !*8 !"65oo o o>55o= ;! 6568o ! 8 8 ;8 !* o ! o5;5".

The majo!it2 de"ision of the ,ou!t of 1&&eals "ites Enlish de"isions to bolste! u& its "on"lusion thatJthe judment admittin the will to &!obate is bindin u&on the whole wo!ld as to the due e*e"utionand enuineness of the will insofa! as "i#il !ihts and liabilities a!e "on"e!ned% but not fo! the &u!&oseof &unishment of a "!ime.J

J1 judment admittin a will to &!obate "annot be atta">ed "ollate!all2 althouh the will was fo!ed@and a &a2ment to the e*e"uto! names the!ein of a debt due the de"edent will dis"ha!e the same%notwithstandin the s&u!ious "ha!a"te! of the inst!ument &!obated. It has also been held that% u&on anindi"tment fo! fo!in a will% the &!obate of the &a&e! in question is "on"lusi#e e#iden"e in thedefendant;s fa#o! of its enuine "ha!a"te!. :ut this &a!ti"ula! &oint has latel2 been !uledothe!wise.J"!alaw #i!tua3aw lib!a!2

T *88; o688o o Co5 o A66! 8 8! ! *5 5>8= !!8*8" o =8 (O6. C8. @o8; !558o >.!558o$ 9 E;8 R658$ 770) !* 21 L. R. A. (66. #-#9 !* o)$ o o= ! 8!! 5 8 o ! !$ !* ! 8Fo58*! ! (. 1#10$ R>8* S!) ! >8* !o >!8*8" o =8 =8 5;!5* o 65o!$ !* 658! !8 ! o 5! !. T! *8** " S65 Co5 o Fo58*! 8* " !?o58" o688o$ 65!$ 55o =8 o o 65o! !* 5! !.

1lthouh in the fo!eoin "ase $State #. ="Gl2nn' the info!mation +led b2 the State was to set asidethe de"!ee of &!obate on the !ound that the will was fo!ed% we see no diMe!en"e in &!in"i&le betweenthat "ase and the "ase at ba!. 1 subtle distin"tion "ould &e!ha&s be d!awn between settin aside ade"!ee of &!obate% and de"la!in a &!obated will to be a fo!e!2. it is "lea!% howe#e!% that a dul2

&!obated will "annot be de"la!ed to be a fo!e!2 without distu!bin in a wa2 the de"!ee allowin saidwill to &!obate. It is at least anomalous that a will should be !ea!ded as enuine fo! one &u!&ose ands&u!ious fo! anothe!.

The 1me!i"an and Enlish "ases show a "onPi"t of autho!ities on the question as to whethe! o! not the&!obate of a will ba!s "!iminal &!ose"ution of the alleed fo!e! of the &!obated will. /e ha#e e*aminedsome im&o!tant "ases and ha#e "ome to the "on"lusion that no +*ed standa!d ma2 be ado&ted o!d!awn the!ef!om% in #iew of the "onPi"t no less than of di#e!sit2 of statuto!2 &!o#isions obtainin indiMe!ent ju!isdi"tions. It behoo#es us% the!efo!e% as the "ou!t of last !eso!t% to "hoose that !ule most"onsistent with ou! statuto!2 law% ha#in in #iew the needed stabilit2 of &!o&e!t2 !ihts and the &ubli"inte!est in ene!al.

To be su!e% we ha#e se!iousl2 !ePe"ted u&on the dane!s of e#asion f!om &unishment of "ul&!itsdese!#in of the se#e!it2 of the law in "ases whe!e% as he!e% fo!e!2 is dis"o#e!ed afte! the &!obate ofthe will and the &!ose"ution is had befo!e the &!es"!i&tion of the oMense. :2 and la!e% howe#e!% thebalan"e seems in"lined in fa#o! of the #iew that we ha#e ta>en. ot onl2 does the law su!!ound thee*e"ution of the will with the ne"essa!2 fo!malities and !equi!e &!obate to be made afte! an elabo!atejudi"ial &!o"eedin% but se"tion 33% not to s&ea> of se"tion H3% of ou! ,ode of ,i#il -!o"edu!e&!o#ides fo! an adequate !emed2 to an2 &a!t2 who miht ha#e been ad#e!sel2 aMe"ted b2 the &!obateof a fo!ed will% mu"h in the same wa2 as othe! &a!ties aainst whom a judment is !ende!ed unde!the same o! simila! "i!"umstan"es. $-e"son #. ,o!onel% -hil.% H.'

The a!ie#ed &a!t2 ma2 +le an a&&li"ation fo! !elief with the &!o&e! "ou!t within a !easonable time%but in no "ase e*"eedin si* months afte! said "ou!t has !ende!ed the judment of &!obate% on the



17/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

!ound of mista>e% inad#e!ten"e% su!&!ise o! e*"usable nele"t. 1n a&&eal lies to !e#iew the a"tion of a"ou!t of +!st instan"e when that "ou!t !efuses to !ant !elief.

1fte! a judment allowin a will to be &!obated has be"ome +nal and una&&elable% and afte! the &e!iod+*ed b2 se"tion 33 of the ,ode of ,i#il -!o"edu!e has e*&i!ed% the law as an e*&!ession of theleislati#e wisdom oes no fu!the! and the "ase ends the!e.

3 o*$ 5o5$ ! 8 >8= o 65o>88o o 8o 0$ !* 2B o o5 Co*o C8>8 Co* +5o*5$ 588! !8o =8 o 8 8 8 ?58*88o !;!8 o5;5 o! =8 =8 !* *" !*8* o 65o! " ! o5 o o6 ?58*88o.

The !esolution of the fo!eoin leal question is suA"ient to dis&ose of the "ase.

)!om the #iew we ta>e of the instant "ase% the &etitione! is entitled to ha#e the "!iminal &!o"eedinsaainst him quashed. The judment of the ,ou!t of 1&&eals is he!eb2 !e#e!sed% without&!onoun"ement !ea!din "osts. So o!de!ed.

17 - G.R. No. L-274 !" 1$ 1972

IN THE ATTER OF THE +ETITION TO A++ROVE THE 3ILL OF CI+RIANO A,UT$ *!*.

GENEROSO A,UT$ 688o5$ GAVINA A,UT$ &etitione! the "ou!t a *uoto substitute he! in lieu of Gene!oso 1but and to admit an amended

&etition whe!ein she &!a2ed that the &!obate of the will be allowed and that lette!s of administ!ation

with the will anne*ed be issued in he! fa#o!. )o! !easons stated in its o!de! of (ul2 5% 3466% he!einabo#e

quoted% the "ou!t a *uodismissed the &etition o!iinall2 b!ouht b2 the de"eased Gene!oso 1but%

Jwithout &!ejudi"e to the +lin of anothe! &etition &u!suant to the !equi!ements of the Rules of ,ou!t.J

ISSUE:



18/23


19/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

0TE8

Se"tions and of Rule 76 !ead8

JSE,. . 5ourt to appoint time $or proving %ill Notice t#ereo$ to be publis#ed K /hen a will is

deli#e!ed to% o! a &etition fo! the allowan"e of a will is +led in% the "ou!t ha#in ju!isdi"tion% su"h "ou!t

shall +* a time and &la"e fo! &!o#in the will when all "on"e!ned ma2 a&&ea! to "ontest the allowan"e

the!eof% and shall "ause noti"e of su"h time and &la"e to be &ublished th!ee $' wee>s su""essi#el2%

&!e#ious to the time a&&ointed% in a news&a&e! of ene!al "i!"ulation in the &!o#in"e.

*** *** ***

SE,. . Heirs, devisees, legatees, and executors to be notifed by mail or personally B The "ou!t shall

also "ause "o&ies of the noti"e of the time and &la"e +*ed fo! &!o#in the will to be add!essed to the

desinated o! othe! >nown hei!s% leatees% and de#isees of the testato! !esident in the -hili&&ines at

thei! &la"e of !esiden"e% and de&osited in the &ost oA"e with the &ostae the!eon &!e&aid at least

twent2 $5' da2s befo!e the hea!in% if su"h &la"es of !esiden"e be >nown. ... -e!sonal se!#i"e of

"o&ies of the noti"e at least ten $3' da2s befo!e the da2 of hea!in shall be equi#alent to mailin.

*** *** ***J

1# - G.R. No. 7#B90 J 20$ 19##

+EDRO DE GU&AN$ &etitione!%

#s.

THE HONORA,LE JUDGE &OSIO &. ANGELES$ RTC ,RANCH B#$ A'ATI$ ETRO$ ANILA

DE+UT SHERIFFS JOSE ,. FLORA !* HONORIO SANTOS !* ELAINE G. DE

GU&AN$ !es&ondents.

)1,TS8

0n =a2 H% 347% &!i#ate !es&ondent Elaine G. de Gu?man +led a &etition fo! the settlement of the

intestate estate of =anolito de Gu?man% RT, of =a>ati. The "ase was do">eted as S&e"ial

-!o"eedins .o. =


20/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

toethe! with some milita!2 men andBo! &oli"emen to assist he! in &!ese!#in the estate of =anolito de

Gu?man.

T!ouble ensued when the !es&ondents t!ied to enfo!"e the abo#e o!de!. The &etitione! !esisted when

De&ut2 She!iMs (ose :. )lo!a and 9ono!io Santos t!ied to ta>e the subje"t #ehi"les on the !ound thatthe2 we!e his &e!sonal &!o&e!ties.

The!eafte!% the instant &etition was +led to annul the lowe! "ou!ts o!de!s dated (une H% 347 and (une

% 347.

In a !esolution dated (une 3% 347% the S, issued a TR0

-ETITI0ER ,0TETS8 that the o!de! is a &atent nullit2% the !es&ondent "ou!t not ha#in a"qui!ed

ju!isdi"tion to a&&oint a s&e"ial administ!at!i* be"ause the &etition fo! the settlement of the estate of

=anolito de Gu?man was o " o5 !58; !* 68* o5 5 o8> =


21/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

In the instant "ase% the!e is no doubt that the !es&ondent "ou!t a"qui!ed ju!isdi"tion o#e! the

&!o"eedins u&on the K8; o ! 688o fo! the settlement of an intestate estate b2 the &!i#ate

!es&ondent sin"e the &etition had alleed all the ju!isdi"tional fa"ts% the !esiden"e of the de"eased

&e!son% the &ossible hei!s and "!edito!s and the &!obable #alue of the estate of the de"eased =anolito

de Gu?man &u!suant to Se"tion 5% Rule 74 of the Re#ised Rules of ,ou!t.

/e must% howe#e!% diMe!entiate between the ju!isdi"tion of the &!obate "ou!t o#e! the &!o"eedins fo!

the administ!ation of an estate and its ju!isdi"tion o#e! the &e!sons who a!e inte!ested in the

settlement of the estate of the de"eased &e!son. The "ou!t ma2 also ha#e ju!isdi"tion o#e! the JestateJ

of the de"eased &e!son but the dete!mination of the &!o&e!ties "om&!isin that estate must follow

established !ules.

S8o $ R 79 o R>8* R o Co5 65o>8* 8

5ourt to set time $or #earing. K oti"e the!eof. K /hen a 688o o5 5 o !*885!8o

is +led in the "ou!t ha#in ju!isdi"tion% su"h "ou!t shall +* a time and &la"e fo! hea!in the &etition%

and shall "ause noti"e the!eof to be i#en to the >nown hei!s and "!edito!s of the de"edent% and to

an2 othe! &e!sons belie#ed to ha#e an inte!est in the estate% in the manne! &!o#ided in se"tions

and of Rule 76.

It is #e!2 "lea! f!om this &!o#ision that the &!obate "ou!t must "ause noti"e th!ouh &ubli"ation of the

&etition afte! it !e"ei#es the same. The &u!&ose of this noti"e is to b!in all the inte!ested &e!sons

within the "ou!ts ju!isdi"tion so that the judment the!ein be"omes bindin on all the wo!ld. 8#ere nonotice as re*uired by :ection 2, @ule 6. o$ t#e @ules o$ 5ourt #as been given to persons believed to

#ave an interest in t#e estate o$ t#e deceased person; t#e proceeding $or t#e settlement o$ t#e estate

is void and s#ould be annulled "#e re*uirement as to notice is essential to t#e validity o$ t#e

proceeding in t#at no person may be deprived o$ #is rig#t to property %it#out due process o$ la%

Ve!il2% noti"e th!ouh &ubli"ation of the &etition fo! the settlement of the estate of a de"eased &e!son

is ju!isdi"tional% the absen"e of whi"h ma>es "ou!t o!de!s aMe"tin othe! &e!sons% subsequent to the

&etition #oid and subje"t to annulment.

In the instant "ase% no noti"e as mandated b2 se"tion % Rule 74 of the Re#ised Rules of ,ou!t was

"aused to be i#en b2 the &!obate "ou!t befo!e it a"ted on the motions of the &!i#ate !es&ondent to be

a&&ointed as s&e"ial administ!at!i*% to issue a w!it of &ossession of alleed &!o&e!ties of the de"eased&e!son in the widows fa#o!% and to !ant he! motion fo! assistan"e to &!ese!#e the estate of =anolito

de Gu?man.



22/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

-etition is GR1TED. The questioned o!de!s of the Reional T!ial ,ou!t% :!an"h H of =a>ati a!e he!eb2

set aside. The "ase is o!de!ed !emanded to the lowe! "ou!t fo! the hea!in of the &etition with &!e#ious

noti"e to all inte!ested &a!ties as !equi!ed b2 law.

24 - A!! > CA

)a"ts8

0n o#embe! 5% !es&ondent )!an"is"o -!o#ido $!es&ondent' +led a &etition% fo! the &!obate of the

9ast 8ill and "estamentof the late Soledad -!o#ido Ele#en"ionado% who died on 56 0"tobe! 5 in

(aniua2% Iloilo. Res&ondent alleed that he was the hei! of the de"edent and the e*e"uto! of he! will. 0n

=a2 53% the Reional T!ial ,ou!t !ende!ed its >ecision allowin the &!obate of the will.

=o!e than fou! $' months late!% &etitione!s +led a motion fo! the !eo&enin of the &!obate

&!o"eedins.Li>ewise% the2 +led an o&&osition to the allowan"e of the will of the de"edent% as well as

the issuan"e of lette!s testamenta!2 to !es&ondent%"laimin that the2 a!e the intestate hei!s of the

de"edent.

The RT, issued an Orderden2in &etitione!s; motion fo! bein unme!ito!ious.

-etitione!s the!eafte! +led a &etitionwith the ,1% see>in the annulment of the RT,;s de"ision. The2

"laimed that afte! the death of the de"edent% &etitione!s% toethe! with !es&ondent% held se#e!al

"onfe!en"es to dis"uss the matte! of di#idin the estate of the de"edent% with !es&ondent a!eein to

a one


23/23

RULE 76 DIGESTS

souht to be annulled% and it is onl2 essential that he "an &!o#e his alleation that the judment was

obtained b2 the use of f!aud and "ollusion and he would be ad#e!sel2 aMe"ted the!eb2.

1n a"tion to annul a +nal judment on the !ound of f!aud lies onl2 if the f!aud is e*t!insi" o! "ollate!al

in "ha!a"te!. )!aud is !ea!ded as e*t!insi" whe!e it &!e#ents a &a!t2 f!om ha#in a t!ial o! f!om

&!esentin his enti!e "ase to the "ou!t% o! whe!e it o&e!ates u&on matte!s &e!tainin not to the

judment itself but to the manne! in whi"h it is &!o"u!ed. The o#e!!idin "onside!ation when e*t!insi"f!aud is alleed is that the f!audulent s"heme of the &!e#ailin litiant &!e#ented a &a!t2 f!om ha#in

his da2 in "ou!t.

The non

Rule 76 Case Digest Compilation

Documents

Transcript of Rule 76 Case Digest Compilation