Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 42 views

    (SPECPRO) (Atty. Tantuico) : ND RD

    Uploaded by

    Joseph Lorenz Asuncion
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeals correctly remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court to properly settle the issue of heirship. When Arturo died intestate in 1972, there was a dispute over who his lawful heirs were between his first wife Fe Quita and alleged surviving spouse Blandina Dandan. The RTC initially failed to fully address this controversy and immediately declared heirs. Since the identity of the legitimate surviving spouse was still unclear, remand was necessary for the RTC to properly hear and decide the issue of heirship, as required by law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    (SPECPRO) (Atty. Tantuico) : ND RD

    Uploaded by

    Joseph Lorenz Asuncion
    42 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeals correctly remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court to properly settle the issue of heirship. When Arturo died intestate in 1972, there was a dispute over who his lawful heirs were between his first wife Fe Quita and alleged surviving spouse Blandina Dandan. The RTC initially failed to fully address this controversy and immediately declared heirs. Since the identity of the legitimate surviving spouse was still unclear, remand was necessary for the RTC to properly hear and decide the issue of heirship, as required by law.

    Original Description:

    SPECPRO

    Original Title

    Quita v CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeals correctly remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court to properly settle the issue of heirship. When Arturo died intestate in 1972, there was a dispute over who his lawful heirs were between his first wife Fe Quita and alleged surviving spouse Blandina Dandan. The RTC initially failed to fully address this controversy and immediately declared heirs. Since the identity of the legitimate surviving spouse was still unclear, remand was necessary for the RTC to properly hear and decide the issue of heirship, as required by law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    42 views1 page

    (SPECPRO) (Atty. Tantuico) : ND RD

    Uploaded by

    Joseph Lorenz Asuncion
    The Supreme Court ruled that the Court of Appeals correctly remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court to properly settle the issue of heirship. When Arturo died intestate in 1972, there was a dispute over who his lawful heirs were between his first wife Fe Quita and alleged surviving spouse Blandina Dandan. The RTC initially failed to fully address this controversy and immediately declared heirs. Since the identity of the legitimate surviving spouse was still unclear, remand was necessary for the RTC to properly hear and decide the issue of heirship, as required by law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    [SPECPRO] [Atty.

    Tantuico] 1

    QUITA v CA  It must be noted as well that during the trial in RTC, the said court only
    G.R. No. 124862| December 22, 1998 required the claiming heirs to submit records of birth. After which, the
    J. Bellosillo issue on declaration of heirs was submitted for resolution.
    Asuncion  On appeal, CA ordered that the case be remanded to RTC to properly
    settle the issue on heirship.
    DOCTRINE: If there is a controversy before the court as to who are the lawful
    heirs of the deceased person or as to the distributive shares to which each ARGUMENTS OF FE
    person is entitled under the law, the controversy shall be heard and decided as  No legal or factual issue obtains for resolution either as to the heirship
    in ordinary cases of the Padlan children or as to their respective shares in the intestate
    estate of the decedent;
    RECIT READY: There is a dispute regarding the right of Fe and Blandina as  The issue as to who is the proper heir of the decedent is one of law
    lawful heirs of Arturo. Since the RTC failed to settle the controversy regarding which can be resolved in the present petition partition based on
    heirship, CA is correct in remanding the case back to RTC to properly determine established facts and admissions of the parties.
    the issue of heirship.
    ISSUE: WON the case should be remanded to RTC to settle the controversy of
    PARTIES INVOLVED: heirship
     FE QUITA AND ARTURO PADLAN: Both Filipinos, married in the
    Philippines and was divorced in the USA, no child YES. CA IS CORRECT IN REMANDING THE CASE TO RTC
     FELIX TUPAZ: 2nd husband of Fe but also got divorced eventually  RULE: Sec. 1, Rule 90 provides that if there is a controversy before the
     WERNIMONT: 3rd husband of Fe court as to who are the lawful heirs of the deceased person or as to the
     LINO INCIONG: Filed for issuance of letters of administration for the distributive shares to which each person is entitled under the law, the
    estate of Arturo controversy shall be heard and decided as in ordinary cases.
     BLANDINA DANDAN: Claiming to be the surviving spouse of Arturo  IN THIS CASE: There is still a controversy as to who is the legitimate
     CLARO, ALEXIS, RICARDO, EMMANUEL, ZENAIDA, YOLANDA: surviving spouse of Arturo since RTC’s immediate declaration of heirs
    claiming to be the children of Arturo and distribution of estate was not properly done.
     THUS: Since there is still a dispute on heirship, remanding the case to
    HOW THE CASE STARTED RTC is proper
     Arturo dies in 1972 leaving no will. Later on, Inciong filed a petition for
    issuance of letters of administration of Estate of Arturo in favor of
    Philippine Trust Company.
     However, such petition was opposed by the claiming surviving spouse
    and children and prayed for appointment of Atty. Cabasal as
    administrator of the subject estate.
     During the trial, the marriage of Blandina and Arturo as well as the
    heirship of the claiming surviving children are being disputed. As a
    result, the trial court required the children to present proofs of
    recognition as legitimate children of Arturo.
     As to heirship, the claiming surviving children were recognized as
    lawful heirs of Arturo. However, Blandina was not recognized as an heir
    since her marriage with Arturo was entered into while Arturo’s first
    marriage with Fe still exists.

    You might also like