Skip to main content

Agtarap v. Agtarap G.R. Nos. 177099 and 177192| June 8, 2011

CASE DIGEST

Agtarap v. Agtarap 
G.R. Nos. 177099 and 177192| June 8, 2011 

Topic: Right of representation, effect of failure to object representation 

Facts: 

Decedent Joaquin contracted (2) marriages. First with with Lucia, bearing three children, Jesus+, Milagros+, Jose+ (survived by three children, namely, Gloria, Joseph, and Teresa) and then lastly when Lucia died, thereafter, with Caridad, with three children, Eduardo, Sebastian, Mercedes. 

Son Eduardo filed petition for settlement of Joaquin’s intestate estate and the RTC issued resolution appointing Eduardo as administrator. 

Gloria Agtarap de Santos, one of the children of compulsory heir Jose in the estate of Joaquin, died on May 4, 1995, was later substituted in the proceedings above by her husband Walter de Santos. On September 16, 1995, Abelardo Dagoro filed a motion for leave of court to intervene, alleging that he is the surviving spouse of the compulsory heir Mercedes Agtarap and the father of Cecilia Agtarap Dagoro, and in his answer in intervention. 

Sebastian, one of the compulsory heirs, filed a motion to exclude Abelardo Dagoro and Walter de Santos as heirs, but was denied by lower court. He points out that his motion was denied by the RTC without a hearing. 

Issue: 

1. WON Walter de Santos and Abelardo Dagoro had the right to participate in the estate in representation of the Joaquins compulsory heirs, Gloria and Mercedes, respectively. – YES 

Held: 

1. Sebastians insistence that Abelardo Dagoro and Walter de Santos are not heirs to the estate of Joaquin cannot be sustained. 

Indeed, this Court is not a trier of facts, and there appears no compelling reason to hold that both courts erred in ruling that… Walter de Santos, and Abelardo Dagoro rightfully participated in the estate of Joaquin. It was incumbent upon Sebastian to present competent evidence to refute his and Eduardos admissions that Joseph and Teresa were heirs of Jose, and thus rightful heirs of Joaquin, and to timely object to the participation of Walter de Santos and Abelardo Dagoro. Unfortunately, Sebastian failed to do so. 

Nevertheless, Walter de Santos and Abelardo Dagoro had the right to participate in the estate in representation of the Joaquins compulsory heirs, Gloria and Mercedes, respectively.
Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Mandamus and its Application in Judicial Proceedings

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy compelling a tribunal, corporation, board, or person to perform a duty expressly required by law . It applies when: 1️⃣ An entity unlawfully neglects the performance of a legal duty arising from an office or trust. 2️⃣ An entity unlawfully excludes another from a right or office to which they are entitled. 3️⃣ There is no other adequate or speedy legal remedy available. 📌 Relevant Case: De Leon v. Duterte (G.R. No. 252118, 2020) Essential Elements of a Mandamus Petition 📌 To successfully invoke mandamus, the petitioner must prove: ✔ Legal Right – The petitioner must demonstrate a clear legal right to compel the action. ✔ Correlative Obligation – The respondent must have a duty to respect that right . ✔ Violation by the Respondent – There must be an act or omission violating the petitioner’s right . ✔ Refusal to Comply – A failure to perform the duty , whether explicit or implied, triggers a cause of action. 📌 Relevant Case: Phi...
Read more

People vs. Jugueta, 788 SCRA 331, G.R. No. 202124 April 5, 2016

G.R. No. 202124. April 5, 2016. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. IRENEO JUGUETA, accused-appellant. PONENTE:  PERALTA, J.:  Synopsis: In Criminal Case No. 7702-G, Irenneo Jugueta was charged with Multiple Attempted Murder along with Gilbert Estores and Roger San Miguel. However, Roger San Miguel moved for reinvestigation of the case and was eventually dismissed, leaving Irenneo as the only defendant. The prosecution's witness, Norberto, testified that Irenneo and the two other men entered his family's nipa hut and fired shots, causing the death of one daughter and injury to another. Irenneo offered a defense of denial and alibi, but this was found to be weak by the trial court, which ruled that Irenneo conspired with the two other men to shoot the family of Norberto. The trial court's judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The main issue raised in the appeal was the inconsistencies in Norberto's testimony, but these were deemed to be trivial an...
Read more

Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 |March 20, 2013

Case Digest: Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 | March 20, 2013 Ponente: 📌 Topic: Applicability of Reserva Troncal – First cousins of the descendant/prepositus are fourth-degree relatives and cannot be considered reservees/reservatarios. Facts The disputed parcel of land was originally owned by Exequiel Mendoza, who inherited it from Placido and Dominga Mendoza through an oral partition. Upon Exequiel’s death, ownership was transferred to his spouse Leonor and their only daughter, Gregoria. After Leonor’s passing, Gregoria became the sole owner. Gregoria died intestate, and her aunt Victoria Pantaleon, Leonor’s sister, adjudicated the property to herself as the sole surviving heir. Petitioners (grandchildren of Placido and Dominga) argued that the property should have been reserved for them under Article 891 of the Civil Code on Reserva Troncal. They filed an action for Recovery of Possession, Cancellation of TCT, and Reconveyance, which the RTC granted. However, the Court of A...
Read more