Bar Qs Flashcards
Q: An heir/oppositor in a probate proceeding filed a motion to remove the administrator on the grounds of neglect of duties as administrator and absence from the country. On his part the heir/oppositor served written interrogatories to the administrator preparatory to presenting the latter as a witness. The administrator objected, insisting that the modes of discovery apply only to ordinary civil actions, not special proceedings. Rule on the matter. (4%) (2008 Bar Question)
The administrator’s contention that the modes of discovery apply only to ordinary civil actions and not to special proceedings is not correct. Section 2, Rule 72 of the Rules of Court provides that: “In the absence of special provisions, the rules provided for in ordinary civil actions shall be, as far as practicable, applicable in special proceedings.” There is no provision to the contrary that would preclude the application of the modes of discovery, specifically Interrogatories to Parties under Rule 25 of the Rules, to probate proceedings.
Q: A, a resident of Malolos, Bulacan, died leaving an estate located in Manila, worth P200,OOO.OO. In what court, taking into consideration the nature of jurisdiction and of venue, should the probate proceeding on the estate of A be instituted? (2003 Bar Question)
The probate proceeding on the estate of A should be instituted in the Municipal Trial Court of Malolos, Bulacan which has jurisdiction, because the estate is valued at P200,000.00, and is the court of proper venue because A was a resident of Malolos at the time of his death. (Sec. 33 of BP 129 as amended by RA 7691; Sec. 1 of Rule 73).
Josefa filed in the Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Alicia and Mabini, a petition for the probate of the will of her husband, Martin, who died in the Municipality of Alicia, the residence of the spouses. The probable value of the estate which consisted mainly of a house and lot was placed at P95.000.00 and in the petition for the allowance of the will, attorney’s fees in the amount of P10,000.00, litigation expenses in the amount of P5,000.00 and costs were included. Pedro; the next, of kin of Martin, filed an opposition to the probate of the will on the ground that the total amount included in (he relief of the petition is more than P100,000.00, the maximum Jurisdictional amount for municipal circuit trial court. The court overruled the opposition and proceeded to hear the case.
Was the municipal circuit trial court correct in its ruling? Why? (5%) (2001 Bar Question)
Yes, the Municipal Circuit Trial Court was correct in proceeding to hear the case. It has exclusive jurisdiction in all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the value of the estate does not exceed P100,000,00 (now (P200.000.00). The value in this case of P95.000.00 is within its jurisdiction. In determining the jurisdictional amount, excluded are attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs; these are considered only for determining the filing fees. (B.P. Big. 129, sec. 33, as amended)
State the rule on venue in judicial settlement of estate of deceased persons. (2%)(2005 Bar Question)
The rule on venue in judicial settlement of estate of deceased persons may be stated as follows: If the decedent is an inhabitant of the Philippines at the time of his death/whether a citizen or an alien, the venue shall be in the Regional Trial Court in the province in which he resides at the time of his death. It cannot be in the place where he used to live (Jao v. Court of Appeals, 382 SCRA 407 [2002]}. If he is an inhabitant of a foreign country, the Regional Trial Court of any province in which he had estate, is the proper venue. The court first taking cognizance of the case shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of all other courts. When the marriage is dissolved by the death of the husband or wife, the community property shall be inventoried, administered, and liquidated, and the debts thereof paid, in the testate or intestate proceedings of the deceased spouse. If both spouses have died, the conjugal partnership shall be liquidated in the testate or intestate proceedings of either. (Secs. 1 and 2, Rule 73, Rules of Court.)
The heirs of H agree among themselves that they will honor the division of H’s estate as indicated in her Last Will and Testament. To avoid the expense of going to court in a Petition for Probate of the Will, can they instead execute an Extrajudicial Settlement Agreement among themselves? Explain briefly. (5%) (2007 Bar Question)
The heirs of H cannot validly agree to resort to extrajudicial settlement of his estate and do away with the probate of H’s last will and testament. Probate of the will is mandatory (Guevarra v. Guevarra, 74 Phil. 479 [1943]). The policy of the law is to respect the will of the testator as manifested in the other dispositions in his last will and testament, insofar as they are not contrary to law, public morals and public policy. Extrajudicial settlement of an estate of a deceased is allowed only when the deceased left no last will and testament and all debts, if any, are paid (Rule 74, Sec. 1, Rules of Court).
Nestor died intestate in 2003, leaving no debts. How may his estate be settled by his heirs who are of legal age and have legal capacity? Explain
If the decedent left no will and no debts, and the heirs are all of age, the parties may, without securing letters of administration, divide the estate among themselves by means of a public instrument or by stipulation in a pending action for partition and shall file a bond with the register of deeds in an amount equivalent to the value of the personal property involved as certified to under oath by the parties concerned. The fact of extrajudicial settlement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation once a week for three consecutive weeks in the province.
The rules on special proceedings ordinarily require that the estate of the deceased should be judicially administered thru an administrator or executor.
What are the two exceptions to said requirement? (5%) (2001 Bar Question)
The two exceptions to the requirement are:
(a) Where the decedent left no will and no debts and the heirs are all of age, or the minors are represented by their judicial or legal representatives duly authorized for the purpose, the parties may without securing letters of administration, divide the estate among themselves by means of a public instrument filed in the office of the register of deeds, or should they disagree, they may do so in an ordinary action of partition. If there is only one heir, he may adjudicate to himself the entire estate by means of an affidavit filed in the office of the register of deeds. The parties or the sole heir shall file simultaneously a bond with the register of deeds, in an amount equivalent to the value of the personal property as certified to under oath by the parties and conditioned upon the payment of any just claim that may be filed later. The fact of the extrajudicial settlement or administration shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the province once a week for three consecutive weeks. (Sec. 1 of Rule 74, Rules of Court)
(b) Whenever the gross value of the estate of a deceased person, whether he died testate or intestate, does not exceed ten thousand pesos, and that fact is made to appear to the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction of the estate by the petition of an interested person and upon hearing, which shall be held not less than one (1) month nor more than three (3) months from the date of the last publication of a notice which shall be published once a week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province, and after such other notice to interested persons as the court may direct, the court may proceed summarily, without the appointment of an executor or administrator, to settle the estate. (Sec. 2 of Rule 74, Rules of Court)
Rene died intestate, leaving several heirs and substantial property here in the Philippines. (1994 Bar Question)
1) Assuming Rene left no debts, as counsel lor Rene’s heirs, what steps would you suggest to settle Rene’s estate in the least expensive manner?
2) Assuming Rene left only one heir and no debts, as counsel for Rene’s lone heir, what steps would you suggest?
3) Assuming that the value of Rene’s estate does not exceed P10,000.00, what remedy is available to obtain a speedy settlement of his estate?
1) To settle Rene’s estate in the least expensive manner, an extrajudicial settlement of the estate by agreement of the parties should be made through a public instrument to be filed with the Register of Deeds, together with a bond in an amount equivalent to the value of the personal property involved as certified to under oath by the parties concerned and conditioned upon payment of any just claim that may be filed within two (2) years by an heir or other person unduly deprived of participation in the estate. The fact of extrajudicial settlement or administration shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks. (Sec. I, Rule 74).
2) If Rene left only one heir, then the heir may adjudicate to himself the entire estate by means of an affidavit of self-adjudication to be filed also with the Register of Deeds, together with the other requirements abovementioned. [Id.)
3) Since the value of Rene’s estate does not exceed P 10,000.00, the remedy available is to proceed to undertake a summary settlement of estates of small value by filing a petition in court and upon hearing, which shall be held not less than one (1) month nor more than three (3) months from the date of the last publication of a notice which shall be published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province and after such other notice to interested persons as the court may direct. The court may proceed summarily without the appointment of an executor or administrator, and without delay, grant, if proper, allowance of the will, if any, to determine the persons legally entitled to participate in the estate, and to apportion and divide it among them after payment of such debts of the estate as the court shall then find to be due. The order of partition if it involves real estate, shall be recorded by the proper register’s office. (Sec. 2, Rule 74).
Pinoy died without a will. His wife, Rosie, and three children executed a deed of extrajudicial settlement of his estate. The deed was properly published and registered with the Office of the Register of Deeds. Three years thereafter, Suzy appeared, claiming to be the illegitimate child of Pinoy. She sought to annul the settlement alleging that she was deprived of her rightful share in the estate. Rosie and the three children contended that (1) the publication of the deed constituted constructive notice to the whole world, and should therefore bind Suzy; and (2) Suzy’s action had already prescribed. Are Rosie and the three children correct? Explain. (4%) (2009 Bar Question)
NO, the contention is not correct. Suzy can file a complaint to annul the extrajudicial settlement and she can recover what is due her as such heir if her status as an illegitimate child of the deceased has been established. The publication of the settlement does not constitute constructive notice to the heirs who had no knowledge or did not take part in it because the same was notice after the fact of execution. The requirement of publication is intended for the protection of creditors and was never intended to deprive heirs of their lawful participation in the decedent’s estate. She can file the action therefor within four (4) years after the settlement was registered.
Czarina died single. She left all her properties by will to her friend Duqueza. In the will, Czarina stated that she did not recognize Marco as an adopted son because of his disrespectful conduct towards her.
Duqueza soon instituted an action for probate of Czarina’s will. Marco, on the other hand, instituted intestate proceedings. Both actions were consolidated before the RTC of Pasig. On motion of Marco, Duqueza’s petition was ordered dismissed on the ground that the will is void for depriving him of his legitime. Argue for Duqueza. (5%) (2010 Bar Question)
The petition for probate of Czarina’s will, as filed by Duquesa should not be dismissed on mere motion of Marco who instituted intestate proceedings.
The law favors testacy over intestacy, hence, the probate of the will cannot be dispensed with. (See Sec. 5, Rule 75) Thus, unless the will – which shows the obvious intent to disinherit Marco – is probated, the right of a person to dispose of his property maybe rendered nugatory (See Seangio v. Reyes, G.R. Nos. 140371-72, Nov. 27, 2006). Besides, the authority of the probate court is generally limited only to a determination of the extrinsic validity of the will. In this case, Marco questioned the intrinsic validity of the will.
Sergio Punzalan, Filipino, 50 years old, married, and residing at Ayala Alabang Village, Muntinlupa City, of sound and disposing mind, executed a last will and testament in English, a language spoken and written by him proficiently. He disposed of his estate consisting of a parcel of land in Makati City and cash deposit at the City Bank in the sum of D300 Million. He bequeathed P50 Million each to his 3 sons md PI 50 Million to his wife. He devised a piece of land worth a100 Million to Susan, his favorite daughter-in-law. He lamed his best friend, Cancio Vidal, as executor of the will without bond. (2006 Bar Question)
No, Cancio Vidal is not obliged to file a petition for probate because under Sec. 3, Rule 75, he is only obliged to deliver the will within twenty (20) days after he knows of the death of the testator.
Supposing the original copy of the last will and testament was lost, can Cancio compel Susan to produce a copy in her possession to be submitted to the probate court? 2%
Yes, as a person having custody of the will, Susan has the duty to deliver the will to the court having jurisdiction or to the executor named in the will within twenty (20) days upon learning the death of the testator (Sec. 2, Rule 75 of the Rules of Court).
Can the widow and her children settle extrajudicially among themselves the estate of the deceased? 2%
No, an extrajudicial settlement of estate by agreement between or among the heirs of the deceased may be had only when the decedent left no will (Sec. 1, Rule 75 of the Rules of Court).
Can the widow and her children initiate a separate petition for partition of the estate pending the probate of the last will and testament by the proper court? 2% (2006 Bar Question)
No, the widow and her children cannot file a separate petition for partition pending the probate of the Will (Sec. 1, Rule 75 of the Rules of Court; Vda. de Kilayko v. Tengco, 207 SCRA 600, [1992]). Partition is part of the testate estate proceeding.
In the Special Proceedings for the settlement of the intestate estate of the deceased Johnny, his widow by his second marriage, Carmelita, moved for her appointment as Administratrix of the estate. This was opposed by Manda, the son of Johnny by his first wife, who moved for his appointment instead. The court appointed Carmelita, the widow, as Administratrix.
(a) How may Manda contest that appointment of Carmelita?
Instead of Administratrix, Carmelita was appointed Special Administratrix.
(b) Is the same remedy available to the oppositor, Manda? Why or why not?
(c) If Johnny left a holographic will, how may it be probated? Explain.
(a) By appeal, because the appointment of an administrator is a final order under Rule 109.
(b) No, because no appeal is allowed from the appointment of a special administrator. (Sec.1(e)
of Rule 109)
(c) A holographic will may be probated by filing a petition for the allowance of said will. If it is not contested, at least one competent witness who knows the handwriting and signature of the testator should explicitly declare that the will and the signature are in the handwriting of the testator. In the absence of any such competent witness, and if the court deem it necessary, expert testimony may be resorted to. If it is contested, at least three witnesses who know the handwriting of the testator should explicitly declare that the will and the signature are in the handwriting of the testator. In the absence of any competent witness, and if the court deem it necessary, expert testimony may be resorted to. (Secs. 1,5 and 11 of Rule 76)
