G.R. No. 7890
September 29, 1914
FILOMENA PECSON, as
administratix of the last will and testament of Florencio Pecson, et al., plaintiffs-appellants,
vs.
ROSARIO MEDIAVILLO, defendant-appellee.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
It appears from the record
that some time prior to the 17th day of September, 1910, the last will and
testament of Florencio Pecson was presented to the Court of First Instance of
the Province of Albay for probate. Mr. Tomas Lorayes, an attorney at law, opposed
the legislation of the will on the ground that it had not been authorized nor
signed by the deceased, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of
Civil Procedure. After hearing the respective parties, the Honorable Percy M.
Moir, judge, found that the will had been signed and executed in accordance
with the provisions of law, and denied the opposition on the 17th day of
September, 1910.
On the 18th day of
September, 1910, the said Tomas Lorayes, representing Basiliso Mediavillo and
Rosario Mediavillo, presented a motion in the words following:
1. That Rosario Mediavillo
is and Joaquin Mediavillo was a legitimate child of the deceased Teresa
Pecson, who also was a daughter of the testator, Florencio Pecson, and
therefore the first mentioned is and the second was a grandchild of the
latter.
2. That the said
granddaughter, Rosario Mediavillo y Pecson, was disinherited by her
grandfather, the testator Florencio Pecson, according to clause 3 of the
will, because she failed to show him due respect and on a certain occasion
raised her hand against him.
3. That the interested
party did not commit such an act, and if perhaps she did, it was due to the
derangement of her mental faculties which occurred a long time ago and from
which she now suffers in periodical attacks.
By reason of all the
foregoing and because the disinheriting clause 3 of the will is unfounded,
the undersigned prays the court to annul the said clause and to make the
testator's died without succession, but is represented now by his father, Basiliso
Mediavillo), participants in the estate left by their grandfather; and,
finally, that the court grant such other relief as it may deem just and
equitable.
After a consideration of
the question presented by said motion, the lower court, on the 22d day of
September, 1911, rendered the following decision:
This case has come up
to-day for a hearing on the declaration of heirs of the decease Florencio
Pecson, who died in Daraga, about the year 1910.
From the evidence it
appears that the deceased had eight children by his wife Nicolasa Manjares,
likewise deceased, which children are those named Emerenciano, Teresa,
Filomena, Asunsion, Rufino, Zoila, Emiliano, and Perfecto, all surnamed
Pecson. It also appears that Rufino Pecson absented himself from these
Islands twenty-five years ago, going to Australia, and that nothing has been
heard of him for the past twenty years. The said Rufino Pecson left no
children in the Philippines and was unmarried when he emigrated. As nothing
has been heard of him for twenty years, it is presumed that he died and it is
held that the part of this estate to which he was entitled must be divided
among the other heirs.
It also appears from the
evidence that Teresa Pecson married Basiliso Mediavillo, by whom she had two
children, Joaquin and Rosario Mediavillo. Teresa also died, leaving these two
children and her husband, Basiliso Mediavillo. Her son Joaquin died,
unmarried and childless, before the death of the testator, Florencio Pecson.
Rosario is the only living daughter of Teresa and the latter's husband,
Basiliso Mediavillo, is also living. The evidence shows that this girl
Rosario became insane in 1895, when she went to Nueva Caceres to study in
college, and it has been proved that it was previous to this date that she
disobeyed her grandfather and raised her hand against him, and, as the
testator states in the third paragraph of his will, he disinherited her. This
court understands that this Rosario, who was then 14 years of age, and who
shortly afterwards became insane, was not responsible for her acts and should
not have been disinherited by her grandfather.
The court therefore decrees
that this part of the will is contrary to law and sets it aside as being of
no force or value whatever. The court further holds that Rosario Mediavillo,
the daughter of Teresa Pecson, is the heiress of the one-half of the share of
this estate pertaining to the said Teresa, and that her father, as the heir
of his son Joaquin, also Teresa's son, is the heris of the other one-half of
the said share pertaining to Teresa — that is, of the one-seventh of this
estate that pertains to the latter. Moreover, the court decrees that, besides
the two heirs just above mentioned, Emerciano, Filomena, Asuncion, Zoila,
Emiliano, and Perfecto, surnamed Pecson, and the children of Teresa, are also
heirs of the estate of Florencio Pecson.
ISSUES OF THE CASE:
FIRST ERROR
The lower court erred in
finding that the part of the will which disinherits Rosario Mediavillo is
contrary to law, and in setting it aside as being of no force or value
whatever.
SECOND ERROR
The lower court erred by
decreeing that Basaliso Mediavillo, the father of Joaquin Mediavillo, is the
heir by representation of the one-half of the one seventh of this estate
pertaining to Joaquin Mediavillo.
RULING OF THE CASE:
With reference to the first
assignment of error it may be said that from the record it appears that
during the lifetime of Florencio Pecson he had been married to Nicolasa
Manjares, with whom he had eight children, named Filomena, Asuncion, Zoila,
Emerenciano, Emiliano, Perfecto, Rufino and Teresa Pecson; that before the
death of Florencio Pecson he executed and delivered the will in question. The
will made no provision for the said Rufino Pecson, neither was there any
provision in the will for the said Teresa. All of the other children were
named as heirs in said will. It appears that Teresa had been married with one
Basiliso Mediavillo, and that some time before the making of the will in
question she died, leaving her husband and two children, Joaquin Mediavillo
and Rosario Mediavillo, as her heirs. It also appears from the record that
Joaquin Mediavillo died without heirs, leaving as the only heirs of the said
Teresa Pecson, her husband, Basilio Mediavillo and the said Rosario Mediavillo.
The said Joaquin Mediavillo died before his grandfather, Florencio Pecson,
and probably before the will in question was made.
Paragraph 3 of the will
disinherited Rosario Mediavillo:
The defendant, Rosario
Mediavillo, in the motion which she presented and which is copied above,
alleges that she was disinherited without case. Upon a consideration of that
question, the lower court found that she had been disinherited without cause
and annulled said paragraph 3 of the will. That order of the lower court constitutes
the error complained of by the appellant in her first assignment of error.
The lower court admitted
proof the question of the responsibility of the said Rosario Mediavillo at
the time she offered the offense to her grandfather, Florencio Pecson. After
hearing the proof, the lower court reached the following conclusion:
The evidence shows that
this girl Rosario became insane in 1895, when she went to Nueva Caceres to
study in college, and it has been proved that it was previous to this date
that she disobeyed her grandfather and raised her hand against him, and, as
the testator states in the third paragraph of his will, he disinherited her.
This court understands that this Rosario, who was then 14 years of age, and
who shortly afterwards became insane, was not responsible for her acts and
should not have been disinherited by her grandfather.
The first assignment of
error presents the question whether or not the courts, when a parent
disinherits his children, may inquire into the cause of the disinheritance
and decide that there was or was not ground for such disinheritance. The
Civil Code (art. 848) provides that disinheritance shall only take
place for one of the causes expressly fixed by law. In accordance with the
provisions of that article (848) we find that articles 756 and 853 provide
the cases or causes for disinheritance; or, in other words, the cases or
causes in which the ancestors may by will disinherit their heirs. Article 849
of the Civil Code provides that the disinheritance can only be effected
by the testament, in which shall be mentioned the legal grounds or causes for
such disinheritance. If it is true that heirs can be disinherited only by
will, and for causes mentioned in the Civil Code, it would seen to follow
that the courts might properly inquire whether the disinheritance has been
made properly and for the causes provided for by law. The right of the courts
to inquire into the causes and whether there was sufficient cause for the
disinheritance or not, seems to be supported by express provisions of the
Civil Code. Article 850 provides that "the proof of the truthfulness of
the reason for disinheritance shall be established by the heirs of the
testator, should the disinherited person deny it." It would appear then
that if the person disinherited should deny the truthfulness of the cause of
disinheritance, he might be permitted to support his allegation by proof. The
right of the court to inquire whether or not the disinheritance was made for
just cause is also sustained by the provisions of article 851, which in part
provides that:
Disinheritance made without
statement of the reason, or for a cause the truth of which, if contradicted,
should not be proven . . . shall annul the designation of heirship, in so far
as it prejudices the person disinherited.
After a careful
consideration of the record, we are inclined to believe that the same
supports the conclusions that he did
not commit the error complained of in the first assignment of error.
With reference to the
second assignment of error, it will be remembered that Teresa Pecson, the
mother of Rosario Mediavillo, at the time of her death left two children,
Rosario and Joaquin, and her husband Basiliso Mediavillo, and that said
Joaquin Mediavillo died without heirs. The lower court gave one-half of the
inheritance of the said Teresa Pecson to Rosario Mediavillo and the share
that would have gone to Joaquin Mediavillo, and the share that would have
gone to Joaquin Mediavillo, to his father Basiliso Mediavillo. In that
conclusion of the lower court we think error was committed. The appellant
relies upon the provisions of article 925 of the Civil Code, in his
contention that the lower court committed an error. Article 925 provides
that:
The right of representation
shall always take place in the direct descending line, but never in the
ascending. In collateral lines, it shall take place only in favor of the
children of brothers or sisters, whether they be of the whole or half blood.
The appellee, in support of
the conclusions of the lower court, cites articles 935 and 936 of the Civil
Code. Article 935 provides that:
In the absence of
legitimate children and descendants of the deceased, his ascendants shall
inherit from him, to the exclusion of collaterals.
Article 936 provides that:
The father and mother, if
living shall inherits share and share alike. If one of them only survive, he
or she shall succeed to the son's entire estate.
It will be remembered that
the whole argument of the appellants with reference to the first assignment
of error was that Rosario Mediavillo had been disinherited and the court
evidently believed that there were no "legitimate children, descendants
of the deceased, surviving," and that therefore the father or mother of
said legitimate children would inherit as ascendants. Inasmuch, however, as
there was a descendant in the direct line, surviving, the inheritance could
not ascend, and for the reason the lower court committed an error in
declaring that Basiliso Mediavillo was entitled to inherit that share of the
estate that would have belonged to Joaquin Mediavillo, had he been living.
Therefore, and for all the foregoing, that part of the judgment of the lower
court nullifying and setting aside paragraph 3 of the will is hereby
affirmed, and that art of said judgment which decrees to Basiliso Mediavillo
one-half of the estate of Florencio Pecson, belonging to Teresa Pecson and
which would have been given to Joaquin Mediavillo, had he been surviving, is
hereby revoked. And without any findings as to costs, it is hereby ordered
that the cause be remanded to the lower court, with direction that judgment
be entered in accordance herewith, and that such further proceedings be had
as the interested parties may deem necessary, for the purpose of disposing of
that part of the inheritance of Teresa Pecson would have belonged to Joaquin
Mediavillo, had he been surviving.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment