Case Digest - Persons4

8/10/2019 Case Digest - Persons4

1/44

Goitia vs. Campos-Rueda35 Phil. 252

Facts: Eloisa Goitia, plaintif-appellant, and Jose Campos-Rueda,deendant, !e"ele#all$ ma""ied in the cit$ o %anila. &he$ esta'lishedthei" "esidence ((5Calle )an %a"celino, !he"e the$ lived to#ethe" o"a'out a month. *o!eve",the plaintif "etu"ned to the home o he" pa"ents. &he alle#ations o the

complaint !e"e that the deendant, onemonth ate" the$ had cont"actedma""ia#e, demanded plaintif to pe"o"munchaste and lascivious acts on his #enitalo"#ans in !hich the latte" "e+ectthe said demands. ith these "eusals, thedeendant #ot i""itated andp"ovoed to malt"eat the plaintif '$ !o"d and deed.na'le to induce thedeendant to desist "om his "epu#nant desi"es and cease omalt"eatin#he", plaintif !as o'li#ed to leave the con+u#al a'ode and tae "eu#einthe home o he" pa"ents. &he plaint if appeals o" a complaint a#ainst he"hus'and o"suppo"t outside o the con+u#al domicile. *o!eve", the deendanto'+ectsthat the acts alle#ed in the complaint do not state a cause o action.

/ssue: hethe" o" not Goitia can claim o" suppo"t outside o the con+u#aldomicile.

Rulin#: %a""ia#e is somethin# mo"e than a me"e cont"act. /t is ane!"elation, the "i#hts, duties and o'li#ations o !hich "est not uponthea#"eement o the pa"ties 'ut upon the #ene"al la! !hich de0nesandp"esc"i'es those "i#hts, duties and o'li#ations. hen the o'+ect oama""ia#e is deeated '$ "ende"in# its continuance intole"a'le to one o thepa"t iesand p"oductive o no possi'le #ood to the communit$, "elie insome !a$should 'e o'taina'le. &he la! p"ovides that deendant, !ho is o'li#ed tosuppo"t the!ie, ma$ ul0ll this o'li#ation eithe" '$ pa$in# he" a 01ed pension o"'$maintainin# he" in his o!n home at his option. *o!eve", the option #iven'$ la! isnot a'solute. &he la! !ill not pe"mit the deendant to evade o"te"minate hiso'li#ation to suppo"t his !ie i the !ie !as o"ced to leavethe con+u#al a'ode'ecause o the le!d desi#ns and ph$sical assaults o the deendant, eat"i ma$claim suppo"t "om the deendant o" sepa"atemaintenance even outside o thecon+u#al home.

/t has 'een held that the !ie, !ho is o"ced to leave the con+u#ala'ode '$

he" hus'and, !ithout ault on he" pa"t, ma$ maintain an actiona#ainst the

hus'and o" sepa"ate maintenance !hen she has no othe""emed$,

not!ithstandin# the p"ovision o the la! #ivin# the pe"son !ho iso'li#ed to u"nish

suppo"t the option to satis$ it eithe" '$ pa$in# a 01edpension o" '$ "eceivin# and

maintainin# in his home the one havin# the"i#ht to the same


2/44

4#apa$ vs. Palan#26 )CR4 37(

Facts: %i#uel Palan# cont"acted his 0"st ma""ia#e to Ca"lina 8alleste"ol in thechu"ch at Pan#asinan. 4 e! months ate" the !eddin#,he le t to !o " in*a! aii . 9ut thei " uni on !as 'o"n *e"m inia Palan# , "espondent. %i#uel"etu"ned to the Philippines 'ut he sta$ed in am'ales!ith his '"othe" du"in# theenti"e du"ation o his $ea"-lon# so+ou"n, not!ith his !ie o" child. %i#uelhad also attempted to divo"ce Ca"lina in*a!ai i. hen he "etu"ned o" #ood, he "eused to l ive !ith his !ie

andchild.he n % i#ue l !as t he n 6 3 $ "s . o ld , he c on t"ac te d h is

se co ndma""ia#e !ith a nineteen $ea" old E"linda 4#apa$, petitione". 4s

evidenced'$ deed o sale, 'oth +ointl$ pu"chased a pa"cel o a#"icultu"al land

locatedat inalonan. 4 house and lot !as lie!ise pu"chased alle#edl$ '$ E"lindaas

the sole vendee. &o settle and end a case 0led '$ the 0"st !ie, %i#uel and

Co"neliae1ecuted a ;eed o ;onation as a o"m o comp"omise a#"eement.&hepa"ties a#"eed to donate thei" con+u#al p"ope"t$ consistin# o si1 pa"cels o land

to thei" onl$ child, *e"minia Palan#.%i#uel and E"l indaui"ed '$coha'itation

'et!een he" and %i#uel.

Rulin#: &he )up"eme Cou"t "uled that the conve$ance o the p"ope"t$ !asnot

'$ !a$ o sale 'ut !as a donation and the"eo"e void. &he t"ansaction!as p"ope"l$

a donation made '$ %i#uel to E"linda, 'ut one !hich !asclea"l$ void and

ine1istent '$ e1p"ess p"ovision o la! 'ecause it !asmade 'et!een pe"sons

#uilt$ o adulte"$ o" concu'ina#e at the time o thedonation.

&he sale o the "iceland !as made in avo" o %i#uel and E"linda. &he

p"ovision o la! applica'le he"e is 4"ticle (7? o the Famil$ Codep"ovidin#o" cases o coha'itation !hen a man and !oman !ho a"e notc ap ac i tat ed to

ma""$ each o the" l i ve e1c lus ive l$ !i th each o the" ashus'and and

!ie !ithou t the 'ene0 t o ma""ia#e o" unde" a void ma""ia#e. hile

%i#uel and E"linda cont"acted ma""ia#e, said union !aspatentl$ void 'ecause

ea"lie" ma""ia#e o %i#uel and Ca"lina !as stillsu'sistin# and unafected '$

the latte"


3/44

pe"suadethe )C that she actuall$ cont"i'uted mone$ to 'u$ the "iceland.

)incepetitione" ailed to p"ove that she cont"i'uted mone$ to the pu"chase p"iceo

the "iceland, )C 0nds no 'asis to +usti$ he" co-o!ne"ship !ith %i#uelove" the same.

Pa"tosa-Jo vs. C42(6 )CR4 6@2

Facts: Jose Jo, "espondent, coha'ited !ith th"ee !omen and athe"ed0teenchild"en. &he 0"st !oman, petitione" P"ima Pa"tosa-Jo claims to 'ehis le#al !ie '$!hom he 'e#ot a dau#hte".Petitione" 0led a complaint a#ainst Jo o" +udicialsepa"at ion o con+u#al p"ope"t$ and an action o" suppo"t. &he complaint o"suppo"t !as#"anted '$ the lo!e" cou"t 'ut the +udicial sepa"ation o con+u#alp"ope"t$!as neve" ente"tained. Jo elevated the decision o" suppo"t to the C4'ut"eta in i t s a= "mation on t " ia l cou"t < s "u l in#. hen the i " mot ions

o""econside"ation !e"e denied, 'oth pa"ties appeal to )C o" the complainto +udicial sepa"ation o con+u#al p"ope"t$. &he )C, th"ou#h the de0nite 0ndin#s othe t"ial cou"t, holds thatthe petitione" and "espondent !e"e le#all$ ma""ied andthat the p"ope"tiesmentioned '$ the petitione" !e"e ac>ui"ed '$ Jo du"in#thei" ma""ia#ealthou#h the$ !e"e "e#iste"ed in the name o an appa"ent dumm$.

/ssue: hethe" o" not the +udicial sepa"ation o con+u#al p"ope"t$ 'e#"antedto the petitione" on the #"ound o a'andonment.

Rulin#: )C #"anted the petit ion. &he "eco"d sho!s that "espondenthadal"ead$ "e+ected the petitione". &he act that she !as not accepted '$

Jodemonst"ates al l too clea"l$ that he had no intention o "esumin#

thei"con+u#al "elationship. &he "espondent also "euses to #ive 0nancial suppo"ttothe petitione". &he ph$sical sepa"ation o the pa"ties, coupled !ith the "eusal '$the"espondent to #ive suppo"t to the petitione", su= ced toconstitutea'andonment as a #"ound o" the +udicial sepa"ation o thei"con+u#alp"ope"t$.


4/44

%ode>uillo vs. "eva(?5 )CR4 66

Facts: 9n Janua"$ 2@, (@??, a +ud#ment !as "ende"ed '$ the Cou"to 4ppeals entitledAF"ancisco )alinas, et al. vs. Jose %ode>uillo, et al.B &he said +ud#ment havin#'ecome 0nal and e1ecuto"$, a !"it o e1ecution !as issued '$ the R&C o

;avao Cit$ to satis$ the said +ud#menton the #oods and chattels o the deendantsJose %ode>uillo and enito %alu'a$ at ;avao del )u". &he she"if levied on a pa"celo "esidential landlocated at ;avao del )u" "e#iste"ed in the name o deendant anda pa"celo a#"icultu"al land located at %alala#, ;avao del )u". 4 motion to >uashando" to set aside lev$ o e1ecution !as 0led'$ deendant Jose %ode>uilloalle#in# the"ein that the "esidential landlocated at Po'lacion %alala# is !he"ethe amil$ home is 'uilt since (@6@p" io " to th e co mm en ce me nt o th is ca seand as such is e1empt "ome1ecution, o"ced sale o" attachment unde"4"t icles (52 and (53 o theFamil$ Code e1cept o" lia'ilities mentioned in 4"ticle(55 the"eo, and thatthe +ud#ment de't sou#ht to 'e eno"ced a#ainst theamil$ home o deendant is not one o those enume"ated unde" 4"ticle (55 o theFamil$Code. 4n opposition the"eto !as 0led '$ the plaintifs.

/ssue: hethe" o" not a 0nal +ud#ment in an action o" dama#es ma$ 'esatis0ed'$ !a$ o e1ecution o a ami l$ home constituted unde" the Famil$ Code.

Rulin#: nde" the Famil$ Code, a amil$ home is deemed constituted on ahouse andlot "om the time it is occupied as a amil$ "esidence. &he"e isno need to constitutethe same +udiciall$ o" e1t"a+udiciall$ as "e>ui"ed inthe Civil Code. / the amil$actuall$ "esides in the p"emises, it is, the"eo"e,a amil$ home as contemplated '$la!. &hus, the c"edito"s should tae thenecessa"$ p"ecautions to p"otect thei"inte"est 'eo"e e1tendin# c"edit tothe spouses o" head o the amil$ !ho o!ns thehome./n the p"esent case, the "esidential house and lot o petitione" !asnotconstituted as a amil$ home !hethe" +udiciall$ o" e1t"a+udiciall$ unde"the Civil

Code. /t 'ecame a amil$ home '$ ope"ation o la! onl$ unde"4"ticle (53 othe Famil$ Code.


5/44

%anacop vs. C42 )CR4 @7(

Facts: Petitione" Flo"ante F. %anacop and his !ie Eulacelipu"chased"esidential lot !ith a 'un#alo!. P"ivate Respondent E D %e"chantile,

/nc.0led a complaint a#ainst petitione" and F.F. %anacop Const"uction Co., /nc.'eo"e

the R&C o Pasi#, %et"o %anila to collect inde'tedness. /nstead o 0lin# an ans!e",

petitione" and his compan$ ente"ed into a comp"omisea#"eement !ith p"ivate

"espondent. &he t"ial cou"t "ende"ed +ud#ment app"ovin# the

ao"ementionedcomp"omise a#"eement. / t en+o ined the pa"t ies to

compl$ !i th thea#"eement in #ood aith. P"ivate "espondent 0led a motion o"

e1ecution!hich the lo!e" cou"t #"anted. *o!eve", e1ecution o the +ud#ment

!asdela$ed. Eventuall$, the she"if levied on seve"al vehic les and

othe"pe"sonal p"ope"ties o petitione". &hese chattels !e"e sold at pu'lic auctiono"

!hich ce"ti0cates o sale !e"e co""espondin#l$ issued '$ the she"if.Petitione" andhis compan$ 0led a motion to >uash the alias !"itso e1ecution and to stop the

she"if "om continuin# to eno"ce them on the#"ound that the +ud#ment !as not

$et e1ecuto"$. P"ivate "espondentopposed the motion. &he lo!e" cou"t denied

the motion to >uash the !"ito e1ecut ion and the p"a$e"s in the

su'se> ue nt ple ad in#s 0 led '$ petitione" and his compan$. Findin# that

petitione" and his compan$ hadnot paid thei" inde'tedness even thou#h the$

collected "eceiva'les, thelo!e" cou"t held that the case had 'ecome 0nal and

e1ecuto"$. /t also"uled that petitione"s "esidence !as not e1empt "om e1ecution

as it !asnot dul$ constituted as a amil$ home, pu"suant to the Civil Code.

/ssue: hethe" o" not a !" i t o e1ecut ion o a 0 nal and

e1e cuto"$ +ud#ment issued 'eo"e the efectivit$ o the Famil$ Code 'e e1ecuted

on ahouse and lot constituted as a amil$ home unde" the p"ovision o Famil$Code.

Rulin#: &he petition is denied o" utte" lac o me"it. /t does not mean that4"ticles

(52 and (53 FC have a "et"oactive efect such that all e1istin#amil$

"esidences a"e deemed to have 'een constituted as amil$ homes atthe time o

thei" occupation p"io" to the efectivit$ o the FC and a"ee1empt "om

e1ecution o" the pa$ment o o'li#ations incu""ed 'eo"e theef ectivi t$ o the


6/44

FC. 4"t. (62 simpl$ means that all e1istin# amil$"esidences at the time

o the efectivit$ o the FC, a"e conside"ed amil$homes and a"e p"ospectivel$

entitled to the 'ene0ts acco"ded to a amil$home unde" the FC.

Espi"itu vs. C4272 )CR4 362

Facts: Petitione" Re$naldo Espi"itu and "espondent &e"esita %asaudin#0"stmet in /li#an Cit$ !he"e Re$naldo !as emplo$ed '$ the ational )teelCo"po"ationand &e"esita !as emplo$ed as a nu"se in a local hospi tal. &e"esita let o" os4n#eles, Calio"nia to !o" as a nu"se. Re$naldo !assent '$ his emplo$e", theati onal )t ee l Co "p o"at ion, to Pit ts'u "#h, Penns$lvania as its liaison o=ce"and Re$naldo and &e"esita then 'e#an tomaintain a common la! "elationship ohus'and and !ie. 9n (@?6, thei"dau#hte", Rosalind &he"ese, !as 'o"n. hile the$!e"e on a '"ie vacationin the Philippines, Re$naldo and &e"esita #ot ma""ied,and upon thei""etu"n to the nited )tates, thei" second child, a son, this time, and

#iventhe name Re#inald 8ince, !as 'o"n on (@??. &he "elationship o the coupledete"io"ated until the$ decided tosepa"ate. /nstead o #ivin# thei"ma""ia#e a second chance as alle#edl$pleaded '$ Re$naldo, &e"esita letRe$naldo and the child"en and !ent 'ac to Calio"nia. Re$naldo '"ou#ht hischild"en home to the Philippines,'ut 'ecause his assi#nment in Pitts'u"#h !as not$et completed, he !assent 'ac '$ his compan$ to Pitts'u"#h. *e had to leave hischild"en !ithhis siste", Guille"ma a$u# and he" amil$. &e"esita, mean!hile, decidedto "etu"n to the Philippines and 0ledthe petition o" a !"it o ha'eas co"pus a#ainst he"ein t!o petitione"s to#ain custod$ ove" the child"en, thussta"tin# the !hole p"oceedin#s no!"eachin# this Cou"t. &he t"ial cou"tdismissed the petition o"ha'easco"pus. /t suspended &e"esitas pa"entalautho"it$ ove" Rosalind andRe#inald and decla"ed Re$naldo to have sole

pa"ental autho"it$ ove" them'ut !ith "i#hts o visitation to 'e a#"eed upon '$the pa"ties and to 'eapp"oved '$ the Cou"t.

/ssue: hethe" o" not the petition o" a !"i t o ha'eas co"pus to#aincustod$ ove" the child"en 'e #"anted.

Rulin#: )C dismissed the !"it o ha'eas co"pus petition '$ the mothe"and"etain the custod$ o the child"en to the athe". &he i ll ic it o"immo"alactivities o the mothe" had al "ead$ caused emot ional


7/44

distu"'ances,pe"sonalit$ conHicts, and e1posu"e to conHictin# mo"al valuesa#ainst thechild"en. &he child"en a"e no! 'oth ove" seven $ea"s old. &hei" choice othepa"ent !ith !hom the$ p"ee" to sta$ is clea" "om the "eco"d. F"omalli nd i ca t i ons , Re$na ldo i s a 0 t pe "son . &he ch i l d "en unde"s tandth euno"tunate sho"tcomin#s o thei" mothe" and have 'een afected inthei"emotional #"o!th '$ he" 'ehavio".

4RR9I9 v 84)E K(@2(L

F4C&):Plaintif %a"iano and deendant ;olo"es !e"e ma""ied in (@(M, and lived in /loilo Cit$.

&he$ lived to#ethe" !ith a e! sho"t inte"vals o sepa"ation. 9n Jul$ 7, (@2M,deendant ;olo"es !ent a!a$ "om thei" common home and decided to livesepa"atel$ "om plaintif. )he claimed that she !as compelled to leave on the 'asis

o c"uel t"eatment on the pa"t o he" hus'and. )he in tu"n p"a$ed o" a dec"ee osepa"ation, a li>uidation o thei" con+u#al pa"tne"ship, and an allo!ance o" counselees and pe"manent sepa"ate maintenance.CF/ "uled in avo" o the deendant and she !as #"anted alimon$ amountin# toP7MM, also othe" eesPlaintif then ased o" a "estitution o con+u#al "i#hts, and a pe"manent mandato"$in+unction "e>ui"in# the deendant to "etu"n to the con+u#al home and live !ith himas his !ie.

/))E):(. 9 deendant had su=cient cause o" leavin# the con+u#al home2. 9 plaintif ma$ 'e #"anted the "estitution o con+u#al "i#hts o" a'solute o"de"

o" pe"manent mandato"$ in+unction

*E;:(. &he !ie had su=cient cause o" leavin# the con+u#al home. C"uelt$ done '$plaintif to deendant !as #"eatl$ e1a##e"ated. &he !ie !as inHicted !ith adisposition o +ealous$ to!a"ds he" hus'and in an a##"avated de#"ee. o su=cientcause !as p"esent.


8/44

Cou"ts should move !ith caution in eno"cin# the dut$ to p"ovide o" the sepa"atemaintenance o the !ie since this "eco#nies the de acto sepa"ation o the t!opa"ties. Continued coha'itation o the pai" must 'e seen as impossi'le, andsepa"ation must 'e necessa"$, stemmin# "om the ault o the hus'and. )he isunde" o'li#ation to "etu"n to the domicile.Nhen people unde"stand that the$ must live to#ethe"Othe$ lea"n to soten '$

mutual accommodation that $oe !hich the$ no! the$ cannot shae of the$'ecome #ood hus'ands and !ivesOnecessit$ is a po!e"ul maste" in teachin# theduties !hich it imposesOB KEvans v. EvansL

2. 9n #"antin# the "estitution o con+u#al "i#hts. /t is not !ithin the p"ovince o thecou"ts to compel one o the spouses to coha'it !ith, and "ende" con+u#al "i#hts to,the othe". /n the case o p"ope"t$ "i#hts, such an action ma$ 'e maintained. )aido"de", at 'est, !ould have no othe" pu"pose than to compel the spouses to liveto#ethe". 9the" count"ies, such as En#land and )cotland have done this !ith muchc"iticism.Plaintif is entitled to a +udicial decla"ation that the deendant a'sented he"sel!ithout su=cient cause and it is he" dut$ to "etu"n. )he is also not entitled to

suppo"t.

uintana vs e"ma

Facts:

/n the case at 'a", deendant-appellant Gelasio e"ma appeals "om the +ud#ment othe lo!e" cou"t #"antin# his !ie, the plaintif-appellee %a"ia uintana, a sum omone$ alle#edl$ due he" 'ased on a cont"act the$ made o" suppo"t.

4s sho!n in the evidence, the t!o !e"e ma""ied in (@M( and ente"ed, in Fe'"ua"$(@M5, into a !"itten a#"eement o sepa"ation, "enouncin# ce"tain "i#hts as a#ainsteach othe", dividin# the con+u#al p"ope"t$ 'et!een them and the deendantunde"tain# the dut$ to p"ovide plaintif P2M-!o"th o monthl$ suppo"t andmaintenance to 'e #iven !ithin the 0"st th"ee da$s o each month.

/n his o"i#inal ans!e" to the action, e"ma claimed that uintana o"eited he" "i#htto suppo"t '$ committin# adulte"$. *o!eve", this special deense !as st"icen out'$ the cou"t on the #"ound that unde" 4"t. (52 o the Civil Code, adulte"$ is not a"eco#nied #"ound upon !hich o'li#ation to suppo"t ceases.


9/44

&he lo!e" cou"t "eused to "eco#nie the same deense !hen deendant "eente"ed itin his amended complaint.

/ssue:

the !"itten a#"eement made '$ pa"ties is void

adulte"$ ma$ 'e pe"mitted as a special deense a#ainst action o" suppo"t

Rulin#:

Ies. &he a#"eement is void 'ecause 4"t. (732 o the Civil Code p"ovides that Nindeault o e1p"ess decla"ations in the ma""ia#e cont"act, the sepa"ation o thep"ope"t$ o the conso"ts, du"in# ma""ia#e, shall onl$ tae place '$ vi"tue o a

+udicial dec"ee, e1cept in the case p"ovided '$ a"ticle 5M.B *o!eve", the !ie has a"i#ht o action a#ainst deendant unde" the Code.

Ies. hile the plaintif !ie has the "i#ht o action, the Cou"t "uled that thedeendant ma$ also set up adulte"$ as a special deense, !hich i p"ope"l$ p"ovedand sustain !ill deeat the !ie


10/44

*E;:hile 4"ticle (33 o the Civil Code conside"s as void a donation 'et!eenthe spouses du"in#ma""ia#e, polic$ conside"ation o the most e1i#ent cha"acte"as !ell as the dictates o mo"alit$ "e>ui"es thatthe same p"ohi'ition should appl$ to acommon-la! "elationship.4s stated in uenaventu"a vs. autista K5M 9G 36@, (@57L, i the

polic$ o the la! is to p"ohi'it donationsin avo" o the othe" conso"t and hisdescendants 'ecause o ea" o undue and imp"ope" p"essu"e andinHuenceupon the dono", then the"e is eve"$ "eason to appl$ the same p"ohi'itive polic$ tope"sons livin#to#ethe" as hus'and and !ie !ithout the 'ene0t o nuptials.&he lac ovalidit$ o the donation '$ the deceased to appellee does not necessa"il$ "esult inappellanthavin# e1clusive "i#ht to the disputed p"ope"t$. 4s a !ido!,Ce"vantes is enti tled to one-hal o theinhe"itance, and the su"vivin# siste" to theothe" hal.4"ticle (MM(, Civil Code: )hould '"othe"s and siste"s o" thei" child"ensu"vive !ith the !ido! o" !ido!e",the latte" shall 'e entitled to one-hal o theinhe"itance and the '"othe"s and siste"s o" thei" child"en to theothe" hal.

9nas vs Javillo

F4C&):

C"ispulo Javillo ma""ied Ramona evis and the$ had 5 child"en. 4te" Ramonaui"ed !hile in his 2nd ma""ia#e 2M pa"cels o land !e"eac>ui"ed.

Pa"tition !as made on the claim that the p"ope"ties o the 2nd ma""ia#e !e"ep"oducts o the 0"st ma""ia#e. - Rosa"io 9nas !as opposin# the pa"tition that !asmade '$ the administ"ato" o the estate o he" hus'and. )he alle#es the ollo!in#e""o"s:


11/44

4ll the p"ope"ties ac>ui"ed du"in# the second ma""ia#e !e"e ac>ui"ed !iththe p"ope"ties o the 0"st ma""ia#e.

&C e""ed in app"ovin# the pa"tition dated )eptem'e" @, (@3(, not!ithstandin#that the same did not include all p"ope"ties o the deceased.

/))E) and R/G:

(L 9 the communit$ pa"tne"ship shall continue to e1ist 'et!een the su"vivin#spouse and the hei"s o the deceased hus'and o" !ie - 9 - hen the ma""ia#e isdissolved, the cause that '"ou#ht a'out the communit$ ceases, o" the p"inciples oan o"dina"$ pa"tne"ship a"e not applica'le to this communit$, !hich is #ove"ned '$special "ules. - P"ovisions o la! #ove"nin# the su'+ect should cease to have an$efect o" communit$ o p"ope"t$ is admissi'le and p"ope" in so a" as it cono"ms tounit$ o lie, to the mutual afection 'et!een hus'and and !ie, and se"ves as a"ecompense o" the ca"e o p"ese"vin# and inc"easin# the p"ope"t$ all o !hichte"minates '$ the death o one o the pa"tne"s. - Communit$ te"minates !hen thema""ia#e is dissolved o" annulled o" !hen du"in# the ma""ia#e and a#"eement isente"ed into to divide the con+u#al p"ope"t$. &he con+u#al pa"tne"ship e1ists as lon#as the spouses a"e united.

2L 9 the p"ope"ties o the second ma""ia#e can 'e claimed as p"oducts o thep"ope"ties o the 0"st ma""ia#e - 9 - hateve" is ac>ui"ed '$ the su"vivin# spouseon the dissolution o the pa"tne"ship '$ death o" p"esumption o death !hethe" theac>uisition 'e made '$ his o" he" luc"ative title, it o"ms a pa"t o his o" he" o!ncapital, in !hich the othe" conso"t, o" his o" he" hei"s, can claim no sha"e.

3L 9 the pa"tition that !as app"oved '$ the lo!e" cou"t is valid - 9 - as 'asedon the e""oneous assumption that the p"ope"ties o the second ma""ia#e !e"ep"oduced '$ the p"ope"ties o the 0"st ma""ia#e. QQ &he p"ope"t$ co""espondin# tothe 0"st ma""ia#e consists o the (( pa"cels o land. &he "emainin# 2M pa"cels oland !e"e ac>ui"ed du"in# the second ma""ia#e.

ulueta vs. Pan 4me"ican o"ld 4i"!a$s

Fac ts : P l ai n tif u lue ta , h i s ! i e and dau#hte " !e"e passen#e"sa'oa"ddeendant


12/44

open his 'a#s !hich he "e u se d a n d h e ! a "n e d t h e m o t h ec o n s e > u e n c e s . J u s t t h e s a m e t h e $ opened his 'a#s and oundnothin# p"ohi'ited. &he$ o"ced him to #o out o the plane and let him atae /sland. *is !ie had to send him mone$ andhe !as a'le to leaveae /sland and "etu"n to %ani la th"u *onolulu and &o$o ate" t!oda$s. &his action !as to "ecove" dama#es "om thedeendant.

/ssue:9 mo"al dama#es ma$ 'e "ecove"ed.

*eld: N&he "eco"ds ampl$ esta'lish plaintifs< "i#ht to "ecove" 'oth mo"al ande1empla"$dama#es. /ndeed, the "ude and "ou#h "eception plaintif "eceivedat the hands o) it to n o " C ap ta in en tn e" ! he n t he l at te " m et h im a t t he " a m pK h at i n t h e h e l l d o $ o u t h i n $ o u a " e S G e t o n t h a t p l a n e < L t h e menacin# attitude o entne" o" )itton and the supe"cilious manne" in !hichhehad ased plaintif to open his 'a#s Kopen $ou" 'a#


13/44

to "edeem mo"t#a#e constituted on such p"ope"t$ !ith unds de"ived "om the "entso" sale the"eo, #"ant a loan o P(MMMM !ith !hich to "edeem mo"t#a#e and collectthe "ents to 'e de"ived "om said p"ope"t$ !hile "emained unsold.

/))E):(. 9 the "ents collected a"e "uits o the !ie


14/44

Fidel 4""iola died and is su"vived '$ his le#al hei"s: John a'o"4""iolaK"espondentL ,his son !ith his 0"st !ie , and 8ilma G.4""iola, his second !ie and hisothe" son, 4nthon$ Ronald 4""iolaKpetitione"sL.9n Fe'. (6, 2MM7, the R&C "ende"ed adecision o"de"in# thepa"tition o the pa"cel o land cove"ed '$ &C& o 3?3(7K?7(@(Llet '$ the decedent Fidel ). 4""iola '$ and amon# his hei"s Johna'o" C.4""iola, 8ilma G. 4""iola and 4nthon$ Ronald G. 4""iola ine>ual sha"es o one-thi"d

K(3L each !ithout p"e+udice to the"i#hts o c"edito"s o" mo"t#a#ees the"eon, ian$.*o!eve", the pa"ties ailed to a#"ee on ho! to divide the a'ovementionedp"ope"t$ and so the "espondent p"oposed to sell itthou#h pu'lic auction. &hepetitione"s initiall$ a#"eed 'ut "eusedto include in the auction the house standin#on the su'+ect land. &he "espondent then 0led an "#ent %aniestation and %otiono" Contempt o Cou"t 'ut !as denied '$ the R&C o" lac o me"it.hen a motion o"econside"ation !as still denied '$ the R&C, the"espondent elevated the case to theC4 !ith a petition o"ce"tio"a"i and p"a$ed that he 'e allo!ed to push th"ou#h !iththeauction o the su'+ect land includin# the house 'uilt on it. &he C4#"anted thepetition and o"de"ed the pu'lic auction sale o thesu'+ect lot includin# the house'uilt on it. Petitione"s 0led amotion o" "econside"ation 'ut the C4 denied the saidmotion.*ence this petition o" "evie! on Ce"tio"a"i.

/ssue:hethe" o" not the su'+ect house is cove"ed '$ the +ud#ment o pa"tition.

Rulin#:&he )up"eme Cou"t a#"ee that the su'+ect house is cove"ed '$ the +ud#ment o pa"tition 'ut invie! o the suspended p"osc"iption imposed unde" 4"ticle (5@ o the amil$ code, the su'+ecthouse immediatel$ pa"titioned to the hei"s.

4"ticle (52. &he amil$ home, constituted +ointl$ '$ the hus'and and the !ie o" '$ anunma""ied head o a amil$, is the d!ellin# house !he"e the$ and thei" amil$ "eside, and theland on !hich it is situated.

4"ticle (53. &he amil$ home is deemed constituted on a house and lot "om the time it isoccupied as a amil$ "esidence. F"om the time o its constitution and so lon# as an$ o its'ene0cia"ies actuall$ "esides the"ein, the amil$ home continues to 'e such and is e1empt "ome1ecution, o"ced sale o" attachment e1cept as he"einate" p"ovided and to the e1tent o thevalue allo!ed '$ la!.

&hus, appl$in# these concepts, the su'+ect house as !ell as the speci0c po"tion o the su'+ectland on !hich it stands a"e deemed constituted as a amil$ home '$ the deceased andpetitione" 8ilma "om the moment the$ 'e#an occup$in# the same as a amil$ "esidence 2M$ea"s 'ac

4"ticle (5@. &he amil$ home shall continue despite the death o one o" 'oth spouses o" o theunma""ied head o the amil$ o" a pe"iod o ten $ea"s o" o" as lon# as the"e is a mino"'ene0cia"$, and the hei"s cannot pa"tition the same unless the cou"t 0nds compellin# "easonsthe"eate". &his "ule shall appl$ "e#a"dless o !hoeve" o!ns the p"ope"t$ o" constituted theamil$ home.


15/44

4nsaldo vs. )he"if

F4C&):4ppellee 4n#el 4nsaldo stood as #ua"anto" o" Roma"ico 4#caoili. *e p"omised toindemni$ the )u"et$

Compan$ o" an$ dama#e that the$ ma$ incu" "om 4#caoili


16/44

J98E49) vs. C42(M )CR4 (26 K4"t. ((67L

Facts:;aniel Jovellanos and Philamlie ente"ed into a a lease and conditional salea#"eement ove" a house and lot. 4t that time, ;aniel Jovellanos !as ma""ied toeono" ;ion, !ith !hom he had th"ee child"en, the petitione"s. eono" ;ion diedconse>uentl$. &hen ;aniel ma""ied p"ivate "espondent 4nnette !ith !hom he 'e#ott!o child"en. &he dau#hte" "om the (st ma""ia#e %e"c$ Jovellanos ma""ied Gil%a"tine and at the 'ehest o ;aniel Jovellanos, the$ 'uilt a house on the 'acpo"tion o the p"emises. ith the lease amounts havin# 'een paid, Philamlie

e1ecuted to ;aniel Jovellanos a deed o a'solute sale and, on the ne1t da$, thelatte" donated to he"ein petitione"s all his "i#hts, title and inte"ests ove" the lot and'un#alo! the"eon. /n (@?5, ;aniel died. P"ivate "espondent 4nnette *. Jovellanosclaimed in the lo!e" cou"t that the ao"estated p"ope"t$ !as ac>ui"ed '$ he"deceased hus'and !hile thei" ma""ia#e !as still su'sistin# and !hich o"ms pa"t othe con+u#al pa"tne"ship o the second ma""ia#e. Petitione"s contend that thep"ope"t$, !e"e ac>ui"ed '$ thei" pa"ents du"in# the e1istence o the 0"st ma""ia#eunde" thei" lease and conditional sale a#"eement !ith Philamlie o )eptem'e" 2,(@55.

/ssue:9 the house and lot pe"tains to the second ma""ia#eS IE)

*eld:&he conditional sale a#"eement in said cont"act is, the"eo"e, also in the natu"e o acont"act to sell, as cont"adistin#uished "om a cont"act o sale. /n a cont"act to sello" a conditional sale, o!ne"ship is not t"anse""ed upon delive"$ o the p"ope"t$ 'utupon ull pa$ment o the pu"chase p"ice. Gene"all$, o!ne"ship is t"anse""ed upondelive"$, 'ut even i delive"ed, the o!ne"ship ma$ still 'e !ith the selle" until ullpa$ment o the p"ice is made, i the"e is stipulation to this efect. &he stipulation isusuall$ no!n as a pactum "ese"vati dominii, o" cont"actual "ese"vation o title, andis common in sales on the installment plan. Compliance !ith the stipulatedpa$ments is a suspensive condition. &he ailu"e o !hich p"events the o'li#ation o

the vendo" to conve$ title "om ac>ui"in# 'indin# o"ce.

;aniel conse>uentl$ ac>ui"ed o!ne"ship the"eo onl$ upon ull pa$ment o the saidamount hence, althou#h he had 'een in possession o the p"emises since)eptem'e" 2, (@55, it !as onl$ on Janua"$ ?, (@5 that Philamlie e1ecuted thedeed o a'solute sale the"eo in his avo".


17/44

;aniel Jovellanos did not en+o$ the ull att"i'utes o o!ne"ship until the e1ecution othe deed o sale in his avo". &he la! "eco#nies in the o!ne" the "i#ht to en+o$ anddispose o a thin#, !ithout othe" limitations than those esta'lished '$ la!, (@ and,unde" the cont"act, ;aniel Jovellanos evidentl$ did not possess o" en+o$ such "i#htso o!ne"ship.pon the e1ecution o said deed o a'solute sale, ull o!ne"ship !as vested in

;aniel Jovellanos. )ince. as ea"l$ as (@6, he !as al"ead$ ma""ied to 4nnette *.Jovellanos, this p"ope"t$ necessa"il$ 'elon#ed to his con+u#al pa"tne"ship !ith hissaid second !ie.

: ut since it pe"tained to the second !ie, she is still lia'le to pa$ theco""espondin# "eim'u"sements to the petitione"s !ho helped pa$ o" theamo"tiation o the house and lot. Remem'e" 4"ticle ((? o the Famil$ Code onp"ope"t$ 'ou#ht on installments, !he"e o!ne"ship is vested du"in# the ma""ia#e,such p"ope"t$ shall 'elon# to the con+u#al pa"tne"ship.

Ce"vantes v Fa+a"do

Facts: &his is a petition o" a !"it o *a'eas Co"pus ove" the pe"son o the mino"4n#elie 4nneCe"vantes.4n#elie 4nn Ce"vantes !as 'o"n on (7 Fe'"ua"$ (@? to Con"ado Fa+a"do andGinaCa""eon, !ho a"e common-la! hus'and and !ie. &he$ ofe"ed the child o"adoption to GinaCa""eons siste" and '"othe"-in-la!, enaida Ca""eon-Ce"vantesand elson Ce"vantes, spouses,!ho too ca"e and custod$ o the child !hen she!as 'a"el$ t!o !ees old. 4n 4=davit oConsent to the adoption o the child !ase1ecuted '$ "espondent Gina Ca""eon. &he petition o"adoption !as 0led '$petitione"s 'eo"e the R&C o Rial, !hich #"anted the petition.)ometime in(@?, the adoptive pa"ents, elson and enaida Ce"vantes,"eceived a lette" "om the"espondents demandin# to 'e paid the amount o P(5M,MMM.MM, othe"!ise, the$ !ould #et 'acthei" child. Petitione"s "eused. 4s a"esult, !hile petitione"s !e"e out at !o", the Gina Ca""eontoo the child "om he"A$a$aA at the petitione"s "esidence, on the p"ete1t that she !asinst"ucted to do so'$ he" mothe". Gina Ca""eon '"ou#ht the child to he" house. Petitione"sdemandedthe "etu"n o the child, 'ut Gina Ca""eon "eused, sa$in# that she had no desi"e to#iveup he" child o" adoption and that the a=davit o consent to the adoption shehad e1ecuted !asnot ull$ e1plained to he".

/ssue: hethe" o" not the natu"al pa"ents o" the adoptive pa"ents have custod$ove" 4n#elie4nn Ce"vantes.

*eld: &he custod$ and ca"e o the mino" 4n#elie 4nne Ce"vantes a"e #"anted topetitione"s,enaida and elson Ce"vantes, to !hom the$ p"ope"l$ 'elon#.

Ratio: /n all cases involvin# the custod$, ca"e, education and p"ope"t$ o child"en,the latte"s!ela"e is pa"amount. &he p"ovision that no mothe" shall 'e sepa"ated"om a child unde" 0ve K5L$ea"s o a#e, !ill not appl$ !he"e the Cou"t 0ndscompellin# "easons to "ule othe"!ise. /n allcont"ove"sies "e#a"din# the custod$ o mino"s, the o"emost conside"ation is the mo"al, ph$sicaland social !ela"e o thechild conce"ned, tain# into account the "esou"ces and mo"al as !ell associalstandin# o the contendin# pa"ents.Con"ado Fa+a"dos "elationship !ith the Gina Ca""eon isa common-la!hus'and and !ie "elationship. *is open coha'itation !ith Gina !ill not acco"dthemino" that desi"a'le atmosphe"e !he"e she can #"o! and develop into an up"i#htand mo"al-


18/44

minded pe"son. Gina Ca""eon had also p"eviousl$ #iven 'i"th to anothe"child '$ anothe" ma""iedman !ith !hom she lived o" almost th"ee K3L $ea"s 'ut!ho eventuall$ let he" and vanished.Fo" a mino" to #"o! up !ith a siste" !hoseAathe"A is not he" t"ue athe", could also afect themo"al outloo and values o saidmino". pon the othe" hand, petitione"s !ho a"e le#all$ ma""iedappea" to 'emo"all$, ph$sicall$, 0nanciall$, and sociall$ capa'le o suppo"tin# the mino"and#ivin# he" a utu"e 'ette" than !hat the natu"al mothe", !ho is not onl$ +o'less 'utalso

maintains an illicit "elation !ith a ma""ied man, can most liel$ #ive he".%ino" has 'een le#all$adopted '$ petitione"s !ith the ull no!led#e andconsent o "espondents. 4 dec"ee o adoptionhas the efect o dissolvin# theautho"it$ vested in natu"al pa"ents ove" the adopted child. &headoptin# pa"entshave the "i#ht to the ca"e and custod$ o the adopted child and e1e"cisepa"entalautho"it$ and "esponsi'ilit$ ove" him.

Laperal vs. RepublicGR No. 18008, October 30, 1962

FACTS:

&he petitione", a 'ona 0de "esident o a#uio Cit$, !as ma""ied !ith %". En"i>ue R.)antama"ia on %a"ch (@3@. *o!eve", a dec"ee o le#al sepa"ation !as late" onissued to the spouses. 4side "om that, she ceased to live !ith En"i>ue. ;u"in#thei" ma""ia#e, she natu"all$ uses Elisea . )antama"ia. )he 0led this petition to 'epe"mitted to "esume in usin# he" maiden name Elisea ape"al. &his !as opposed '$the Cit$ 4tto"ne$ o a#uio on the #"ound that it violates 4"t. 32 o the Civil Code.)he !as claimin# that continuin# to use he" ma""ied name !ould #ive "ise toconusion in he" 0nances and the eventual li>uidation o the con+u#al assets.

ISSUE: hethe" Rule (M3 !hich "ee"s to chan#e o name in #ene"al !ill p"evailove" the speci0c p"ovision o 4"t. 32 o the Civil Code !ith "e#a"d to ma""ied!oman le#all$ sepa"ated "om his hus'and.

HELD:

/n le#al sepa"ation, the ma""ied status is unafected '$ the sepa"ation, the"e 'ein#no seve"ance o the vinculum. &he 0ndin# that petitione"


19/44

automaticall$ 'een dissolved and li>uidated. *ence, the"e could 'e no mo"eoccasion o" an eventual li>uidation o the con+u#al assets.

Fu"the"mo"e, appl$in# Rule (M3 is not a su=cient #"ound to +usti$ a chan#e o thename o Elisea o" to hold othe"!ise !ould 'e to p"ovide o" an eas$ ci"cumventiono the mandato"$ p"ovision o 4"t. 32.

Petition !as dismissed.

YASIN v SHARIA COURT

FACTS: 9n %a$ 5, (@@M, *atima C. Iasin 0led in the )ha"ia ;ist"ict Cou"tin a m ' o a n # a C i t $ a A P e t i t i o n t o " e s u m e t h e u s e o m a i d e nn a m e . B & h e "espondent cou"t issued an o"de" !hich o"de"ed amendmentsto the peti tionas it !as not su=cient in o"m and su'stance in acco"dance Rule(M3, Ruleso Co u"t, "e#a "din # th e "es ide nce o p etit ione " an d th ena me so u# ht to 'e adopted is not p"ope"l$ indicated in the title the"eo!hich should include all the names '$ !hich the petitione" has 'een no!n.*atima 0led a motion o" "econside"ation o the ao"esaid o"de" alle#in# thatthe petition 0led is notcove"ed '$ Rule (M3 o the Rules o Cou"t 'ut is me"el$ apetition to "esumethe use o he" maiden name and su"name ate" the dissolution ohe" ma""ia#e'$ divo"ce unde" the Code o %uslim Pe"sonal a!s o the

Phil ippines, andate" ma""ia#e o he" o"me" hus'and to anothe"!oman. &he "espondentcou"t denied the mot ion s ince compl iance to"ule (M3 is necessa"$ i thepet i t ion is to 'e #"anted, as i t !ould"esult in the "esumption o the use o petitione"


20/44

a#ain to anothe" !oman and the o"me" desi "es to "esumehe" maiden name o" su"name, is she "e>ui"ed to 0le a petition o" chan#e onameand compl$ !ith the o"mal "e>ui"ements o Rule (M3 o the Rules o Cou"t.

HELD:9hen a !oman ma""ies a man, she need not appl$ ando" see

+ud ic ia lautho" it$ to use he" hus'ands name '$ p"e01in# the !o"d A%"s.A'eo"e he" hus'ands ull name o" '$ addin# he" hus'ands su"name to he" maiden0"stname. &he la! #"ants he" such "i#ht K4"t. 3M, Civil CodeL. )imila"l$, !henthema""ia#e ties o"vinculumno lon #e " e1i st s as in the cas e o de ath o the hus'and o" divo"ce asautho"ied '$ the %uslim Code, the !ido! o" divo"ceeneed not see +udicialcon0"mation o the chan#e in he" civil status in o"de" to"e v e " t t o h e " m a i d e nna me as th e us e o he " o "m e" hu s' an d s na me i s optional and noto'li#ato"$ o" he". hen petitione" ma""ied he" hus'and, shedid not chan#e he"name 'ut onl$ he" civil status. eithe" !as she "e>ui"ed tose c u "e + u d i c i a lautho " i t $ to use the su"name o he " hus'and a te " thema"" i a#e ,

as no la! "e>ui"es it. &he use o the hus'ands su"name du"in# thema""ia#e, ate"annulment o the ma""ia#e and ate" the death o the hus'andis pe"missive and noto'li#ato"$ e1cept in case o le#al sepa"ation.& h e c o u " t 0 n d s t h e p e t i t i o nt o " e s u m e t h e u s e o m a i d e n n a m e 0 l e d ' $ p e t i t i o n e " ' e o " et h e " e s p o n d e n t c o u " t a s u p e " H u i t $ a n d u n n e c e s s a " $ p "oc ee di n#since th e la! "e>ui"es he" to do s o as he" o"me " hus' and is al"ead$ma""ied to anothe" !oman ate" o'tainin# a dec"ee o divo"ce "omhe" inacco"dance !ith %uslim la!s.

Versola vs CA

Facts: ;olo"es edesma secu"ed a P(m loan "om ;"a 9h. edesma sold the house andlot to petitione"s Edua"do and Elsa 8e"sola o" 2.5m !ith a do!n pa$ment o (m. ledesmaased o" the "est o the pa$ment. Petitione"s !e"e onl$ a'le to #ive 5M. Petitione"s secu"ed aloan "om 4siat"ust an to pa$ o" thei" "emainin# 'alance. an settled an a#"eement'et!een pa"ties that ;". 9h !ill #ive anothe" 75M to edesma main# he" de't (.75m.

)pouses should e1ecute a mo"t#a#e to secu"e a loan o 2m. hen 4siat"ust t"ied to "e#iste" themo"t#a#e o the spouses, it discove"ed a notice o lev$ o e1ecution on the title in connection!ith anothe" o edesma


21/44

Held: &he house is not e1empted "om e1ecution. /t is not su=cient that the pe"son claimin#e1emption me"el$ alle#es that such p"ope"t$ is a amil$ home. &he claim must 'e p"oved to the)he"if. &he "eco"ds in the case do not disclose that petitione"s p"oved that the p"ope"t$ to 'esold !as F*. &he$ simpl$ alle#ed it, and p"esupposed that the she"if al"ead$ ne! o such.

&he$ "i#o"ousl$ asse"ted such e1emption onl$ 2 $ea"s ate" the date o the auction sale. &hei"asse"tion o" e1emption the"eo"e is a me"e ate"thou#ht, a shee" a"ti0ce to dep"ive p"ivate

"espondent o the "uits o the ve"dict o he" case.

De Leon vs RFC, ! SCRA "#$

Facts: 9n 9cto'e" ?, (@5(, Jose Ponce ;e eon and F"ancisco )o"iano tooout a loan "om the Reha'ilitation Finance Co"po"ation o" RFC Kno! ;evelopment

an o the PhilippinesL o" P7@5,MMM.MM. &he loan !as secu"ed '$ a pa"cel o lando!ned '$ )o"iano. 4 deed o mo"t#a#e!as then e1ecuted in vie! o the loan.)o"iano and Ponce de eon also e1ecuted a p"omisso"$ note in the amount oP7@5, pa$a'le in monthl$ installments o P2?,?3(.67.

Pa"t o the P7@5 !as used to pa$ of the p"evious encum'"ances amountin# toP(35 on the p"ope"t$ o )o"iano. &he "est !e"e "eleased to Ponce de eon in


22/44

va"ious amounts "om ;ecem'e" (@5( to Jul$ (@52, still pu"suant to the deed omo"t#a#e.

&he loan !ent unpaid and so RFC initiated a o"eclosu"e p"oceedin# on themo"t#a#ed p"ope"t$. 4cco"din# to RFC, the monthl$ pa$ments !e"e supposed to 'edue in 9cto'e" (@52.

/n his deense, Ponce de eon insists that the amo"tiations neve" 'ecame due'ecause alle#edl$, RFC did not complete the dis'u"sement o the loan to himKalle#edl$, P(@ !as !ithheldL. *e also invoes that on the ace o the p"omisso"$note it !as !"itten that the installments have Nno 01ed o" dete"mined dates opa$mentB. *ence, the monthl$ pa$ments !e"e neve" due the"eo"e the o"eclosu"eis void. *e insists that the cou"t should 0"st dete"mine the date o matu"it$ o theloan.

ISSUE: hethe" o" not Ponce de eon is "i#ht.

HELD: o. ;u"in# t"ial and 'ased on the "eco"ds, Ponce de eon


23/44

ma""ia#e, and thehei"s o his othe" deceased child Kalso "om the 0"st ma""ia#eL.

o!e" cou"t divided the p"ope"ties in the ollo!in# !a$:

a. W 3 child"en o 0"st ma""ia#e'. X ;o"oteac. X child"en o 'oth ma""ia#e Kdivided in (3 pa"tsL.

C4: Point o contention !as Caana!an lands in ueva Eci+a. 9the" lands 'elon#tosecond ma""ia#e o p"oo p"ope"t$ o!ned '$ second ma""ia#e

&estimon$ o ;o"otea not pe"suasive

%oises Pat"icio places ac>uisition sometime ate" the "evolution: Rosa !as

stillalive at this time C: con+u#al pa"tne"ship o 0"st ma""ia#e t"anso"med into co-o!ne"ship '$

icolasand his child"en, thus "uits 'elon# to co-o!ne"ship. C4 disa#"ees !ith C: *9E8ER, /& 4) ;9R9&E4 4; /C94) *9C&/84&E;

&*E 4;, *ECE &*E FR/&) 9F &*E 4; )*9; G9 &9 &*E)EC9;%4RR/4GE. ;o"otea elevated case to )C. 4cco"din# to he", Canaa!anp"ope"ties !e"e not pa"t o 0"st ma""ia#eui"ements o la! a"e ul0lled:a.Pe"son 0lin#application 'aced '$ t!o c"edi'le !itnesses has to p"ove he has"esided andcultivated the land o" 5 $ea"s ate" 0lin# application'.Pe"son 0lin# has to maea= davit attestin# that the land is notencum'e"edalienated. ands !e"e onl$dist"i'uted '$ ca'ecillas in (@M5

hen ;ac>uel, 4ntolin, and Pascua conve$ed the land to icolas, the$ couldnothave ul0lled the "e>ui"ements o 4ct @26 'eo"e conve$ances to ;elio.;ac>uel, less than a $ea", 4ntolin, 2 $ea"s, Pascua, 3 $ea"sY &he 3 did not have le#al "i#hts to t"anse" to ;elio. hat the$ t"anse""ed!e"einchoate "i#hts, not o!ne"ship "i#hts.Y PR/C/PE: ;ecidin# acto" !he"e homestead 'elon#s to time o "e#ist"ation 9&!hen homestead patent is issued as "e#ist"ation is the onl$time all "e>ui"ementshave 'een ul0lled.

Philippine ational an vs. %a"#a"ita uintos E Ipa""a#ui""e and 4n#el 4. 4nsalso


24/44

Facts: 9n June 2M, (@(? P #"anted the deendants a c"edit to the amount o P3(,2?7 to!hichdeendants mo"t#a#ed stocs "om P/, CompaZia avie"a, ;avao 4#"icultu"e andComme"cialCompan$ etc. /n the document, it did not clea"l$ sho! that the$ !e"e hus'and and!ie, e1cept inthei" civil statues. 9n 4p"il 2, (@2( Jul$ 22, (@2( a complaint !as 0led "e>ui"in#%". 4nsalso to pa$ his de't.)C Fi"st &R/4: ;eendants claim that thei" de't is not o a solida"$

natu"e and should thus onl$ 'ind one tothe e1tent o thei" sha"e in the o'li#ation thus shouldnot 'e cha"#ed to thei" con+u#al pa"tne"ship.*o!eve" 4"t (7M? o CC p"ovides that all de'tsincu""ed '$ 'oth hus'and and !ie du"in# thema""ia#e a"e cha"#ea'le to the con+u#alpa"tne"ship thus %a"#a"ita, the !ie, is pa"t o theo'li#ation as he" hus'and as the le#almana#e" o the con+u#al pa"tne"ship is lia'le o" the de't. )up"eme Cou"t 0"st decision held thatcon+u#al pa"tne"ship should 'e used to pa$ o" the de'tincu""ed as !ell as p"ivate p"ope"t$ oeach o them since the$ a"e 'oth o'li#ated.)C 2nd&R/4 K;EC/)/9 P9 %9&/9F9RREC9)/;ER4&/9L Reasse"ts that con+u#al p"ope"t$ is lia'le o" the de't the$ incu""ed ashus'and and !ie. Con+u#al pa"tne"ship 'e#ins e1istin# at cele'"ation o ma""ia#e.Con0ned to p"ope"ties stated in 4"t (7M( o CC T KaL &hose ac>ui"ed '$ one"ous Kheav$o'li#ationsL title du"in# thema""ia#e at the e1pense o the common p"ope"t$ !hethe" theac>uisition is made o" thecommunit$ o" o" onl$ one o themK'Lthose o'tained '$ the indust"$,

sala"$ o" la'o" o the spouses o" an$ o themKcL the "uits, "ents o" inte"est "eceived o" acc"uin#du"in# thema""ia#e, "om the common o" the p"ivate p"ope"t$ o each o the spouses. Con+u#alpa"tne"ship ;9E) 9& me"#e the p"ope"ties the$ ac>ui"ed 'eo"e. &he"est o the p"ope"t$ thatthe spouse ac>ui"ed 'eo"e thei" ma""ia#e is sepa"ate "omthe con+u#al pa"tne"ship.Gua"anteed '$ a'solute sepa"ation o capitals.

ISSUE: hethe" o" not the$ a"e +ointl$ lia'le o" the de'ts incu""ed th"ou#h con+u#alpa"tne"ship

HELD: nde" e! Civil Code (6@? it states that pa"tne"s a"e not solida"il$ lia'le !ith "espect tothe de'to the pa"tne"ship e! Civil Code ((3 that solida"it$ !ill e1ist onl$ !hen it ise1p"essl$dete"mined. %eanin#, pa"tne" cannot 'e solida"it$ lia'le o" the de'ts o the

pa"tne"ship, 'ecausethe"e is no le#al p"ovision imposin# such 'u"den up on one. 4nd it is no!held that p"ope"ties o the con+u#al pa"tne"ship o the deendants a"e lia'le o" the de't to theplaintif, and in deaultthe"eo, the$ a"e +ointl$ lia'le o" the pa$ment the"eo. /t is 'ein#unde"stood that the +ud#mentappealed "om is modi0ed in the sense a'ove stated and themotion o the appellants is denied.


25/44

4#apito o"eno vs. Flo"encio icolas Et 4l.

Facts: P"io" to (@(M, %a#dalena Clemente !as the su"vivin# !ido! o the deceased G"e#o"ioicolas,%anuel o"eno, o"me" hus'and o the deceased Ca"losa )antama"ia, !as also at thattime a!ido!e". 9n Janua"$ (6, (@(M, %a#dalena Clemente and %anuel o"eno cont"actedma""ia#e.%anuel o"eno died on Janua"$ , (@2@, !hile %a#dalena died on Janua"$ 3(, (@37.;u"in# thei" cove"tu"e, the t!o had no child"en. /n his 0"st ma""ia#e, ho!eve", %anuel o"enolet, as hei"s,the plaintifs 4#apito and %a"cela o"eno and Polica"pio o"eno, deceased, !hohad 'eensucceeded '$ his child"en, the plaintifs Faustina, Fede"ico, Guille"mo and %anuel allsu"namedo"eno !hile %a#dalena Clemente, in he" 0"st ma""ia#e, let as hei"s, the deceasedGe"a"do icholas, athe" o the deendants Flo"encio, Elena, Feli1, &"inidad, Cecilia and asilisa,allsu"named icolas.

4s to Pa"cel o land o. 6 . [ &his pa"cel o land !hich is lot o. 2 o the F"ia"sand)u'division in Gui#uinto, ulacan, !as pu"chased in he" o!n name '$ %a#dalenaClemente, o" he" o!n e1clusive 'ene0t on 9cto'e" (, (@M?, p"io" to he" ma""ia#e !ith %anuelo"eno. )hehad paid the sum o P(6@.(6 on account o the pu"chase p"ice 'eo"e he" ma""ia#e!ith o"enoand, acco"din# to the te"ms o the cont"act o the sale, the 'alance o P?33.32 !aspa$a'le oninstallments, namel$: P25.32 on June (, (@M@, and the 'alance in annual pa$ment oP72.MM each, pa$a'le on the 0"st da$ o June o each $ea", plus inte"est o 7\ pe" annum. . &heamount spent o" the pa$ments o installments due du"in# the ma""ia#e, o" o'li#ations afectin#the sepa"ate p"ope"t$o %a#dalena Clemente, is ce"tainl$ a useul e1penditu"es 'ecause itp"ese"ves he" "i#ht to theo!ne"ship o the land, and is, the"eo"e, a c"edit !hich 'elon#s to thecon+u#al pa"tne"ship, andmust 'e "eim'u"sed to it '$ he".

4s to Pa"cel o land o. 5 . [ &his pa"cel !as also pu"chased '$ %a#dalena Clemente"om theu"eau o ands on 9cto'e" (, (@M? o" P@6.(6, o !hich amount P((6.?7 hadp"eviousl$ 'een paid '$ he", 'eo"e he" ma""ia#e to %anuel o"eno. 4cco"din# to the te"ms othe sale, the 'alance o P?5M.32 !as pa$a'le '$ installments: namel$, P52.32 on June (, (@M@,and P72.MMannuall$ on June (, o each succeedin# $ea". Pa$ments on account o theinstallments !e"e made '$ he", the "eceipts the"eo" !e"e issued in he" o!n name '$ theu"eau o ands. 9n 9cto'e" ,(@33 o" 7 W $ea"s ate" the death o %anuel o"eno, the 0nal,ce"ti0cate o sale !as e1ecuted '$the ;i"ecto" o ands in he" avo" and in he" name. $ vi"tuethe"eo, &"anse" Ce"ti0cate o &itle o. (326@ !as issued in the sole name o %a#dalenaClemente. &he le#al p"inciples he"eina'ovediscussed appl$ !ith e>ual o"ce to this pa"cel oland o. 5.

/ssue: hethe" o" not that pa"cels o land no. 5 and 6 held to 'e a pa"aphe"nal p"ope"ties o"e1clusive p"ope"t$ o %a#dalena Clemente.

*eld: /n case o death o a holde" o a ce"ti0cate !hich is onl$ an a#"eement to sell it is not thehei"s 'utthe !ido! !ho succeeds in the pa"cels o land to 'e sold '$ the Gove"nment. 9nl$ dothe hei"ssucceed in the "i#hts o the deceased holde" o a ce"ti0cate i no !ido! su"vives him.


26/44


27/44

Ju"isdiction o the cou"t is dete"mined '$ the statute in o"ce at the time o thecommencement o the action. &he cont"ove"s$ should 'e "esolved in the li#ht o thela! #ove"nin# at the time the petition !as 0led. /n this case, it !as months ate" theefectivit$ o R4 ?552 that ahom 0led an action to "evoe the dec"ee o adoption#"anted in (@2. $ then the ne! la! had al"ead$ a'"o#ated and "epealed the "i#hto the adopte" unde" the Civil Code and the amil$ Code to "escind a dec"ee oadoption. )o the "escission o the adoption dec"ee, havin# 'een initiated '$ ahomate" R4 ?552 had come into o"ce, could no lon#e" 'e pu"sued.

In Re Ado.t&on o/ Ste.0an&e 1arc&a, 1R No% )2#))

Facts: *ono"ato . Catindi# 0led a petition to adopt his mino" ille#itimate child )tephanie4sto"#a Ga"cia. *e ave""ed that )tephanie !as 'o"n on June 26, (@@7 that )tephanie had 'eenusin# he" mothe"uali0ed to'e he" adoptin# pa"ent. *e p"a$ed that )tephanie


28/44

PABLO-GUALBERTO VS. COURT OF APPEALSG.R. Nos. 154994 and 156254 Jun 2!" 2##5

Fa$%s& C'(san%o Ra)a*(%o G. Gua*+'%o V )(*d +)o' %, RTC a %(%(on )o' d$*a'a%(on o) nu**(% o) ,(s /a''(a0 %oJo$*n an an$(**a' 'a' )o' $us%od ndn% *(% o) %,(' a*/os% 4 a' o*d son" Ra)a**o" ,o/ ,' () %oo3aa ,' )'o/ %,(' $onu0a* ,o/ and ,(s s$,oo* ,n s, *)% ,(/.T, RTC 0'an%d %, an$(**a' 'a' )o' $us%od ndn% *(%" s(n$ %, () )a(*d %o aa' ds(% no%($. A ,ous,*' o) %, souss %s%()(d %,a% %, /o%,' dos no% $a' )o' %, $,(*d as s, ' o)%n 0os ou% o) %, ,ous andn sa ,' s*a(n0 %, $,(*d. Ano%,' (%nss %s%()(d %,a% a)%' su'(**an$ , )ound ou% %,a% %, () (s ,a(n0*s+(an '*a%(ons.

T, ud0 (ssud %, assa(*d o'd' ''s(n0 ,' '(ous o'd'" and %,(s %(/ aa'dd %, $us%od o) %, $,(*d %o %,/o%,'. F(nd(n0 %,a% %, 'ason s%a%d + C'(san%o no% %o + a $o/**(n0 'ason as 'o(dd (n A'% 21 o) %, Fa/(*Cod.

7ssu& 8,%,' o' no% %, $us%od o) %, /(no' $,(*d s,ou*d + aa'dd %o %, /o%,'.

*d& A'%($* 21 o) %, Fa/(* Cod 'o(dd& :A'% 21. 7n $as o) sa'a%(on o) a'n%s a'n%a* au%,o'(% s,a** +;'$(sd + %, a'n% ds 0'an%d + %, $ou'%. T, $ou'% s,a** %a3 (n%o a$$oun% a** '*an% $ons(d'a%(on"s$(a** %, $,o($ o) %, $,(*d o' sn a's o) a0" un*ss %, a'n% $,osn (s un)(%.uestion hadal"ead$'een t"anse""ed to petitione"s on 4u#ust , (@?5, '$ vi"tue o a !"it o possession,dated Jul$ (?, (@?5, issued '$ the cle" o cou"t o the Re#ional &"ial Cou"t o Capi,%am'usao, the "etu"n the"eo havin#'een "eceived '$ petitione"s counsel thatsince then, petitione"s have'een di"ectl$ "eceivin# "entals "om the tenants othe land, that thecomplaint ailed to state a cause o action since it did notalle#e


30/44

thatea"nest ef o"ts to!a"ds a comp"omise had 'een made, conside" in#that petitione" 4u#usto *ontive"os and p"ivate "espondentG"e#o"io* o n t i v e " o s a " e ' " o t h e " s t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n o t h e /n t e " m e d i a t e 4ppellate Cou"t in and Re#ist"ation Case o. -5?(-25!as null andvoid since it !as 'ased upon a #"ound !hich !as not passedupon

'$t h e t " i a l c o u " t t h a t p e t i t i o n e " s c l a i m o " d a m a # e s ! a s ' a " "e d ' $ p"esc"iption !ith "espect to claims 'eo"e (@?7 that the"e !e"eno"entals due since p"ivate "espondent *ontive"os !as a possesso"in# o o d a i t h a n d o " v a l u e a n d t h a t p " i v a t e " e s p o n d e n t 4$ s o nh ad n o t h i n # t o d o ! i t h t h e c a s e a s s h e ! a s n o t m a " " i e d t op " i v a t e "espondent G"e#o" io *ont ive"os and d id not have an$ p"op" ieta"$inte"est in the su'+ect p"ope"t$. P"ivate "espondents p"a$ed o"thedismissal o the complaint and o" an o"de" a#ainst petitione"s topa$dama#es to p"ivate "espondents '$ !a$ o counte"claim, as !ellas"econve$ance o the su'+ect land to p"ivate "espondents.

/))E:& he Re # i o na l &" i a l C o u " t pa l pa ' l $ e " "e d i n d i sm i s s i n#t h e complaint on the #"ound that it does not alle#e unde" oath that ea"nestef o"tsto!a"d a comp"omise !e"e made p"io" to the 0lin# the"eo as"e>ui"ed '$4"ticle (5( o the Famil$ Code.

*E;: &he t"ial cou"t e""ed in dismissin# petitione"s complaint onthe#"ound that, althou#h it alle#ed that ea"nest efo"ts had 'eenmadeto!a"d the settlement o the case 'ut the$ p"oved utile, the complaint!asnot ve"i0ed o" !hich "eason the t"ial cou"t could not 'elieve theve"acit$ othe alle#ation. &he a'se nce o t he v e" i0 cat ion "e> ui "ed in 4 "t. (5(doesn ot af e c t t h e + u " i s d i c t i o n o t h e c o u " t o v e " t h e s u ' + e c t m a t t e "

o t h e complaint. &he ve"i0cation is me"el$ a o"mal "e>ui"ement intendedt o s e c u " e a n a s s u " a n c e t h a t m a t t e " s ! h i c h a " e a l l e # e d a " e t " u ea n d co""ect. / the cou"t dou'ted the ve"acit$ o the alle#ations"e#a"din#efo"ts made to settle the case amon# mem'e"s o the same amil$,itcould simpl$ have o"de"ed petitione"s to ve"i$ them. 4s this Cou"t hasal"ead$"uled, the cou"t ma$ simpl$ o"de" the co""ection o unve"i0edp le ad in#s o"act on i t and !aive st" ic t compl iance !i th the "ulesino " d e " t h a t t h e e n d s o + u s t i c e m a $ ' e s e " v e d . 9 t h e " ! i s e, m e " e suspicion o" dou't on the pa"t o the t"ial cou"t as to the t"uth othealle#ation that ea"nest efo"ts had 'een made to!a"d a comp"omise'utthe pa"t ies ef o"ts p"oved unsuccessul i s not a #"ound o"thedismissal o an action. 9nl$ i it is late" sho!n that such efo"ts had

not"eal l$ 'een e1e"ted !ould the cou"t 'e +ust i0 ed in dismiss in# theaction.%o"eove", as petitione"s contend, 4"t. (5( o the Famil$ Codedoes notappl$ in this case since the suit is not e1clusivel$ amon# theamil$ mem'e"s. Citin#seve"al cases decided '$ this Cou"t, petitione"scl ai m that !heneve" ast"an#e" is a pa"t$ in the case involv in#the a m i l $ m e m ' e " s , t h e " e > u i s i t e s h o ! i n # t h e e a " n e s t e f o " t s t o comp"omise i s no lon#e" mandato"$. &he$ a"#ue that s incep" iv at e"espondent 4$son is admittedl$ a st"an#e" to the *ontive"osamil$,the case is not cove"ed '$ the "e>ui"ements o 4"t. (5( o the


31/44

Famil$Code.e a#"ee !ith petitione"s. &he inclusion o p"ivate"espondent4$son as deendant and petitione" %a"ia *ontive"os as plaintiftaesthe case ou t o the am' it o 4"t . (5( o t he Famil$ Code . nde"thisp"ovis ion, the ph"aseAm em 'e "s o the sa me ami l$ A "e e "s to th ehus'and and !ie, pa"ents andchild"en, ascendants and descendants, and '"othe"s and siste"s, !hethe" ull o" hal

'lood. 4s this cou"t held in Gue""e"o vs R&C, /locos o"te.Reli#ious "elationship and "elationship '$ a=nit$ a"e not #iven an$ le#al efect inthis +u"isdiction. Conse>uentl$, p"ivate "espondent 4$son, !ho is desc"i'ed in thecomplaint as the spouse o "espondent *ontive"s, and petitione" %a"ia *ontive"os,a"e conside"ed st"an#e"s to the *9ntive"os amil$, o" pu"pose o 4"t (5(.

REYNALDO ES3IRITU and 1UILLERA LAYU1 vs% COURT OF A33EALS and TERESITA

ASAUDIN1

Facts: Re$naldo Espi"itu and &e"esita %asaudin# 0"st met in /li#an Cit$. &e"esita let o" os4n#eles to !o" as a nu"se !he"e she !as a'le to ac>ui"e immi#"ant status sometime late".Re$naldo !as sent '$ his emplo$e" to Pitts'u"#h as its liaison o=ce". Re$naldo and &e"esita'e#an to maintain a common-la! "elationship o hus'and and !ie !he"e a child !as 'o"n,Rosalind &he"ese. ;u"in# thei" vacation in the Philippines, Re$naldo and &e"esita #ot ma""iedand '$ the time the$ "etu"ned to the nited )tates, Re#inald 8ince !as 'o"n. &he "elationshipsoon dete"io"ated and &e"esita let he" amil$ to #o 'ac to Calio"nia. ecause his assi#nmentis not $et completed, Re$naldo had to leave his child"en !ith his siste", Guille"ma a$u#, in thePhilippines. Results o child ps$cholo#$ tests on Rosalind !hen she !as 0ve $ea"s old sho! that

the child e1pe"iences #"eat an1iet$ at the thou#ht o havin# to #o 'ac to the .). to live !ithhe" mothe". )he even stated in one o these tests that she sa! he" mothe" issin# a N'adB man!ho !o"ed o" he" athe". oth child"en a"e no! ove" seven $ea"s o a#e and p"ee" to sta$!ith thei" athe" and aunt.

/ssue: hethe" o" not custod$ o the child"en should 'e a!a"ded to the mothe".


32/44

*eld: 9, 4) 9&* C*/;RE 4RE 9 98ER )E8E IE4R) 9F 4GE, &*E/R C*9/CE 9FP4RE& )*9; E G/8E RE)PEC& I &*E C9R&. &he "ule that a child 'elo! seven $ea"s oa#e should not 'e sepa"ated "om the mothe", unless the"e a"e compellin# "easons is notapplica'le in this case an$mo"e. 4s the child"en can no! asce"tain !hat is "i#ht and mo"al, thecou"t should #ive due "espect to thei" decision to sta$ !ith thei" athe" and aunt in thePhilippines. Fu"the"mo"e, a mothe"ui"ements ound in 4"ticle 2(3K(L o the Famil$Code.

IN RE: 4OSE -ERAS AND 3ILAR -ERAS,)2 SCRA "*

Facts:

pon the 0lin# o the petition, the cou"t issued an o"de" settin# it o" hea"in# on Jul$ , (@62, and

caused a notice to that efect to 'e pu'lished in a ne!spape" o #ene"al ci"culation inam'oan#a Cit$, once a !ee, o" th"ee K3L consecutive !ees. 4te" said hea"in#, the cou"t"ende"ed the appealed decision, den$in# the petition upon the #"ound that, unde" 4"ticle (@2 othe Civil Code o the Philippines, a con+u#al pa"tne"ship shall onl$ 'e dissolved once le#alsepa"ation has 'een o"de"ed, and this cannot tae place, pu"suant to 4"ticle (@( o the sameCode, e1cept upon civil inte"diction decla"ation o a'sence o" a'andonment.

/ssue:


33/44

hethe" o" not con+u#al pa"tne"ship ma$ also 'e dissolved, upon a#"eement !ith +udicialapp"oval pu"suant to 4"ticle (@(S

*eld:

&he hus'and and the !ie ma$ a#"ee upon the dissolution o the con+u#al pa"tne"ship du"in#the ma""ia#e, su'+ect to +udicial app"oval. 4ll the c"edito"s o the hus'and and o the !ie as !ellas o the con+u#al pa"tne"ship shall 'e noti0ed o an$ petition o" +udicial app"oval o thevolunta"$ dissolution o the con+u#al pa"tne"ship, so that an$ such c"edito"s ma$ appea" at thehea"in# to sae#ua"d his inte"ests. pon app"oval o the petition o" dissolution o the con+u#alpa"tne"ship, the cou"t shall tae such measu"es as ma$ p"otect the c"edito"s and othe" thi"dpe"sons.

TULOS VS FERNANDE5, 1R6)*!78, A.r&l )", "888

Facts:

%a"io and ou"des Fe"nande !e"e the plaintifs in an action o" e+ectment 0led 'eo"e "anch?2 o the %&C o 8alenuela, %et"o %anila a#ainst Guille"ma &umlos, &oto &umlos and Gina

&umlos. ;eendant Guille"ma &umlos !ill pa$ P(,6MM.MM a month !hile the othe" deendantsp"omised to pa$ P(,MMM.MM a month 'oth as "ental. )pouses have also demanded pa$mentincu""ed o" the last seven $ea"s. )uch demands !e"e unheeded thus this p"esent action o thespouses. &he %&C p"omul#ated its decision on Janua"$ 22, (@@. &he deendants appeals to theR&C, alle#ed in thei" memo"andum on appeal that %a"io Fe"nande and Guille"ma had an


34/44

amo"ous "elationship, and ac>ui"ed the p"ope"t$. /t !as u"the" alle#ed that the$ lived to#ethe"in the said apa"tment 'uildin#. Guille"ma administe"ed the p"ope"t$ '$ collectin# "entals "omthe lessees o the othe" apa"tments, until she discove"ed that %a"io deceived he" as to theannulment o his ma""ia#e.

/ssue:

hethe" o" not Guille"ma &umlos is a Co-o!ne" o the said apa"tment unde" 4"ticle (7?S

*eld:

%a"io Fe"nande is validl$ ma""ied to ou"des Fe"nande, Guille"ma and %a"io a"e notcapacitated to ma""$ each othe". &hus, the p"ope"t$ "elation #ove"nin# thei" supposedcoha'itation is that ound in 4"ticle (7? o

the Famil$ Code. Nit is clea" that actual cont"i'ution is "e>ui"ed '$ its

p"ovision, in cont"ast to 4"ticle (7 o the Famil$ Code !hich states that efo"ts in the ca"e andmaintenance o the amil$ and household a"e "e#a"ded as cont"i'utions to the ac>uisition ocommon p"ope"t$ '$ one !ho has no sala"$ o" income o" !o" o" indust"$. )uch p"ovision is notincluded in a"ticle (7? o the Famil$ Code.

-A-AO VS VILLAVICENCIO, 22 3HIL $")

Facts:

/n the p"oceedin# o" the settlement o the intestate estate o /#nacio &"illanes, %a"ia a'ao, thehe"ein appellee, petitioned the cou"t 'elo! that an additional invento"$ 'e made o ce"tainp"ope"ties o the deceased and an allo!ance 'e made to he" mino" child"en o" thei" suppo"t,pendin# the dist"i'ution o the estate. &hese mino"s a"e child"en o Jose &"illanes. &his petition


35/44

!as opposed '$ the administ"at"i1 o the estate on the #"ound that said mino"s a"e not entitledto the suppo"t applied o", 'ecause section 6?7 o the Code o Civil P"ocedu"e p"ovides onl$ o"the suppo"t o the child"en o the deceased and not o his #"andchild"en. &he lo!e" cou"t,ho!eve", held othe"!ise and allo!ed P(5 monthl$ pension to. &he administ"at"i1 o the estateappealed "om this "ulin#.

/ssue:

hethe" o" not the "i#ht to the p"ovisional suppo"t #"anted '$ section 6?7 o the Code o CivilP"ocedu"e e1tends to the #"andchild"en o the deceasedS

*eld:

&he o"dina"$ acceptation, the"eo"e, o the !o"d Ahi+oA o" child does not include AnietoA o"A#"andchild.A &he "ee"ence made in the ao"esaid section to Aallo!ances as a"e p"ovided '$ thela! in o"ce in the Philippine /slands,A does not, in the opinion o the cou"t, have the efect o

e1tendin# the "i#ht to this p"ovisional suppo"t to pe"sons othe" than the child"en o thedeceased. 4ppellee does not, and cannot, invoe 'ut section 6?7 o the Code o Civil P"ocedu"ein suppo"t o he" petition, !hose p"ovisions on this point do not, in the opinion o the cou"t,e1tend to the #"andchild"en o the deceased. )he cannot invoe the Civil Code 'ecause the#"andathe" a#ainst !hose estate the allo!ance claimed is to 'e cha"#ed is no! dead, andthe"eo"e the o'li#ation o such a #"andathe" to #ive suppo"t !as al"ead$ e1tin#uished. K4"t.(5M, Civ. Code.L

OORE AND SONS CO VERSUS 9A1NER, 78 3HIL )"#

Facts:


36/44

/t is also appea"s "om the "eco"d on appeal that the claims a#ainst the estate allo!ed '$ thesaid committee amount to P2, 75.@@. ot!ithstandin# this insolvent condition o the estate,the lo!e" cou"t ente"ed the o"de" "ee""ed to o %a"ch 5, (@25, citin# in its suppo"t a"ticle (73Mo the Civil Code and section 6?7 o the Code o Civil P"ocedu"e.

/ssue:

hethe" o" not suppo"t 'e demanded !hen the lia'ilities e1ceed the assets o the estate o thedeceased spouseS

*eld:

&he +ud#ment o the )up"eme Cou"t o )pain o %a$ 2?, (?@6, "esolves this >uestiona="mativel$. )ometime ate" the death o he" hus'and, the !ido! applied o" suppo"t "om the#ene"al invento"ied estate o the p"ope"t$ "om the date o the death o the hus'and until thedelive"$ o he" sha"e. &he cou"t #"anted the application and the 4udiencia a="med its decision.

%". %an"esa, commentin# on said a"ticle (73M "elative to the said +ud#ment o %a$ 2?, (?@6,!isel$ o'se"ves A&hat the suppo"t does not encum'e" the p"ope"t$ o the deceased spouse, 'utthe #ene"al estate, and that '$ the #ene"al estate o" the invento"ied estate is meant the do!"$o" capital o the !ie !he"eo"e, even i the inde'tedness e1ceed the "esidue o the estate, the!ie can al!a$s 'e allo!ed suppo"t as pa"t pa$ment o the income o he" p"ope"t$. /n an$ case,the suppo"t is #iven p"io" to the te"mination o the li>uidation o the pa"tne"ship, and it does notseem lo#ical to den$ the same 'eo"e no!in# e1actl$ the "esult o the li>uidation, +ust 'ecauseo the ea" that the lia'ilities !ill e1ceed the estate, o" on the #"ound o estimates mo"e o" lessunce"tain, and !ithout an$ su=cient p"oo o its "ealit$. &he +ud#e o" the administ"ato", as thecase ma$ 'e, must #"ant the suppo"t.


37/44

1ON5ALES VS ILLER, !$ 3HIL 28

F4C&):

*avin# issued !"it o e1ecution, is em'a"#oed the lots 356 and 35, desc"i'ed in the ce"ti0cates

o title ?33 and ?32, "espectivel$, !hich lots had 'ou#ht Catalina Climacus o /sa'elo F"ontand Julian /n F"ont on 26 ovem'e" (@2? !ith mone$ "om its e1clusive p"ope"t$. *avin# passedthe deadline o" the "et"acted them and not havin# e1e"cised the "i#ht, the )he"if oam'oan#a P"ovincial #"anted 0nal deed o sale o these lots in avo" o the plaintif.

/))E:

hethe" o" not the lots in >uestion a"e he"e pa"aphe"nal Catalina Climacus o" spouses o he"and he" hus'and, Cha"les *. %ille"S

*E;:

4"ticle (7M o the Civil Code states that A/t inhe"e ac>ui"ed all the assets o the ma""ia#e !hileit is p"oved that p"ivatimente 'elon# to the hus'and o" the !ie.A hile it is t"ue that !henCatalina Climacus ac>ui"ed '$ pu"chase "om /sa'elo F"ont and Julian 'eo"e ovem'e" 26,(@2? lots. 356 4nd 35 !as al"ead$ ma""ied to Cha"les *. %ille", consists o" his statement notcont"adicted o" challen#ed o alse that the mone$ !ith !hich the ac>ui"ed !as its e1clusivep"ope"t$ o" pa"ae"nal. &he act that the t"anse" ce"ti0cates o title !e. ?32 4; ?33, "elatin#to the menmencionados lots, does not sa$ that the "e#iste"ed o!ne"s a"e Catalino Climacusand he" hus'and Cha"les *. %ille", 'ut that is said to 'e Catalina Climacus sa$s, Athe !ie oCha"les *. %ille",A indicates the pa"aphe"nal !ie Cathe"ine Climacus, since the En#lish ph"aseAthe !ie o Cha"les *. %ille"A is simpl$ a desc"iption o thei" ma"ital status


38/44

3ERE5 VS 3ERE5, )8$ 3HIL !2

Facts:

9n M3 June (@?5, a civil case o" 4nnulment o Pu'lic 4uction )ale !ith ;ama#es coupled !ithP"elimina"$ /n+unction and P"a$e" o" Rest"ainin# 9"de" !as 0led '$ he"ein petitione"s a#ainstthe "espondents 'eo"e the Re#ional &"ial Cou"t KR&CL, alan#a, ataan. /t !as o"i#inall$assi#ned to "anch 3, 'ut !as late" "e-"a]ed to "anch (, p"esided ove" '$ Jud#e en+amin &.8ianon. 4te" t"ial, a decision !as eventuall$ p"omul#ated '$ the R&C on (( 4u#ust (@@3.Findin# no me"it in the complaint, it dismissed the case. ot satis0ed !ith the R&Cui"ements o" the validit$ o the she"if


39/44

RODRI1UE5 VERSUS DELA CRU5, # 3HIL !!7

Facts:

9n the 2(st da$ o 4u#ust, (@M5, the plaintif, th"ou#h he" atto"ne$s, 0led an amendedcomplaint in the Cou"t o Fi"st /nstance o the P"ovince o 4l'a$ o" the pu"pose o "ecove"in#"om the deendant ce"tain pieces o" pa"cels o land desc"i'ed in the complaint, alle#in#: &hatshe !as the o!ne" o the said lands that she had ac>ui"ed said lands du"in# he" 0"st ma""ia#e"om he" deceased athe". 4s a special deense the deendants set up the +ud#ment o the Cou"to Fi"st /nstance o the P"ovince o 4l'a$ o the 2@th o %a"ch, (@M5. &he lo!e" cou"t ound as a

act "om the evidence adduced du"in# the t"ial that the lands desc"i'ed in the complaint !e"eac>ui"ed '$ *ila"ion de la C"u, the athe" o the p"esent deendants, Adu"in# his ma""ied lie!ith his 0"st !ie, 4nd"ea de eon,A.

/ssues:

hethe" o" not said p"ope"t$ 'elon#s to *ila"ion dela C"uS

*eld:

4"ticle (3?2 o the Civil Code p"ovides that the !ie shall "etain the o!ne"ship o he" p"ope"t$!hich she '"in#s to the ma""ia#e "elation. /t is t"ue that a"ticle (3?7 p"esc"i'es that she shallhave the mana#ement o the p"ope"t$, unless she !as delive"ed the same to he" hus'and '$means o a pu'lic document, p"ovidin# that he ma$ administe" said p"ope"t$ 'ut it cannot 'eclaimed "om the me"e act that she has pe"mitted he" hus'and to administe" he" p"ope"t$!ithout havin# his autho"it$ to do so evidenced '$ a pu'lic document, that she has the"e'$ losthe" p"ope"t$ and that the same has 'ecome the p"ope"t$ o he" hus'and. o such claim !asmade in the cou"t 'elo! on 'ehal o the deendants. &hei" claim !as that the said *ila"ion de laC"u had ac>ui"ed said p"ope"t$ du"in# the e1istence o his ma""ia#e !ith his 0"st !ie, 4nd"eade eon.


40/44

u&;&


41/44

4OCSON VS E3IRE INSURANCE CO%

Facts:

A0us%(n Jo$son" ,o as ao(n%d 0ua'd(an o) %, 'sons and 'o'%(s o) ,(s /(no' $,(*d'n Ca'*os"

Rodo*)o" P'*a" En'(=u and Jsus" ,ad a +ond )(*d (%, E/(' 7nsu'an$ Co. )o' su'% and /ana0d ,(s

$,(*d'n>s 'o'%(s %,a% (n$*udd a' da/a0 a/n%s" ,($, )o'/d a'% o) %,(' (n,'(%an$ )'o/ %,('

/o%,'.

7n %, $ou's o) %, 0ua'd(ans,(" A0us%(n su+/(%%d '(od($ a$$oun%s %o %, $ou'% )o' ;nss )o' du$a%(on

and $*o%,(n0 o) %, $,(*d'n.

A)%' ,(s da%," P'*a" ,o ,ad a*'ad 'a$,d a0 o) /ao'(% and %,'a)%' ao(n%d 0ua'd(an o) ,' s%(**

/(no' +'o%,'s En'(=u and Jsus" )(*d a %(%(on )o' %, 'on(n0 o) A0us%(n>s a$$oun%s" $*a(/(n0 %,a% (**0a*

d(s+u's/n%s ' /ad )'o/ %, 0ua'd(ans,( )unds )o' du$a%(on and $*o%,(n0. Uon 'a$,(n0 a0 o)

/ao'(%" En'(=u and Jsus ado%d %, %(%(on and /od )o' d$*a'a%(on o) (**0a*(% o) d(s+u's/n%s?

,($, E/(' 7nsu'an$ Co. and A0us%(n>s ad/(n(s%'a%'(; aa*d )'o/?on %, 0'ound %,a% %,s s,ou*d ,a

$o/ (ns%ad )'o/ %, suo'%" ,($, %, ' n%(%*d %o '$( )'o/ %,(' )a%,'.

Issue:

8N %, %(%(on's-a**an%s> $on%n%(on %,(' )a%,'>s d(s+u's/n%s )'o/ %,(' 0ua'd(ans,( )unds a'

(**0a* a' a*(d

Ruling:

No. T, Cou'% 'u*d %,a% '(0,% %o suo'% @,($, (n$*uds du$a%(on and $*o%,(n0 /us% + d/andd and

s%a+*(s,d +)o' (% +$o/s aa+*. 7% dos no% a'(s )'o/ %, %(%(on's> /' '*a%(ons,( (%, %,('

)a%,'. :T, nd )o' suo'%" as a*'ad s%a%d" $anno% + 'su/d and s$(a** /us% %,(s + %'u (n %,

'sn% $as ,' (% aa's %,a% %, /(no's ,ad /ans o) %,(' on.< T,')o'" %, d(s+u's/n%s /ad +
http://lazylegalboneswilldigest.wordpress.com/2012/02/11/jocson-vs-empire-insurance-co/http://lazylegalboneswilldigest.wordpress.com/2012/02/11/jocson-vs-empire-insurance-co/


42/44


43/44


44/44

Case Digest - Persons4

Documents