100%(3)100% au considerat acest document util (3 voturi)
854 vizualizări3 pagini
This case involves the intestate estate of Vito Borromeo who died in 1952 without a valid will. Several parties later came forward claiming to be heirs. In 1989, the trial court declared 9 individuals, excluding Fortunato Borromeo, as the intestate heirs. Fortunato later claimed a portion of the estate based on a 1953 waiver signed by some heirs relinquishing their shares. The petitioner contested the waiver's validity. The trial court upheld the waiver's validity in 1931 but the Supreme Court ultimately ruled the waiver was not effective as the signatories did not have clear intent to relinquish their rights based on subsequent documents and agreements between the parties. The Court also affirmed the trial court had jurisdiction to determine the waiver
This case involves the intestate estate of Vito Borromeo who died in 1952 without a valid will. Several parties later came forward claiming to be heirs. In 1989, the trial court declared 9 individuals, excluding Fortunato Borromeo, as the intestate heirs. Fortunato later claimed a portion of the estate based on a 1953 waiver signed by some heirs relinquishing their shares. The petitioner contested the waiver's validity. The trial court upheld the waiver's validity in 1931 but the Supreme Court ultimately ruled the waiver was not effective as the signatories did not have clear intent to relinquish their rights based on subsequent documents and agreements between the parties. The Court also affirmed the trial court had jurisdiction to determine the waiver
This case involves the intestate estate of Vito Borromeo who died in 1952 without a valid will. Several parties later came forward claiming to be heirs. In 1989, the trial court declared 9 individuals, excluding Fortunato Borromeo, as the intestate heirs. Fortunato later claimed a portion of the estate based on a 1953 waiver signed by some heirs relinquishing their shares. The petitioner contested the waiver's validity. The trial court upheld the waiver's validity in 1931 but the Supreme Court ultimately ruled the waiver was not effective as the signatories did not have clear intent to relinquish their rights based on subsequent documents and agreements between the parties. The Court also affirmed the trial court had jurisdiction to determine the waiver
INTESTATE ESTATE OF THE LATE VITO ORRO!EO, "ATROCINIO ORRO!EO- HERRERA, petitioner, vs. FORT#NATO ORRO!EO $%& HON. FRANCISCO ". #RGOS, Ju&'( o) *+( Cou,* o) F-,.* I%.*$%/( o) C(0u, ,$%/+ II, respondents. Vito Borromeo, a widower, died on March 13, 1952, at the age of 88 years, without forced heirs ut !eaving e"tensive properties in the province of #eu. $!! his rothers and sisters predeceased him. %n $pri! 19, 1952, JOSE J#N1#ERA fi!ed a petition for the proate of a one page document as the !ast wi!! and testament, devising a!! his properties to &omas, 'ortunato and $me!ia (a!! surnamed Borromeo), in e*ua! and undivided shares and designating +un*uera as e"ecutor. %ppositions to the proate of the wi!! were fi!ed. %n May 28, 19,-, the proate court he!d that the document presented as *+( 2-ll o) *+( &(/($.(& 2$. $ )o,'(,y. &he decision was affirmed upon appea!. T+( *(.*$*( 3,o/((&-%'. 2$. /o%4(,*(& -%*o $% -%*(.*$*( 3,o/((&-%'.. .evera! parties came efore the court fi!ing c!aims or petitions a!!eging themse!ves as heirs of the intestate estate of Vito Borromeo. %n $pri! 1-, 19,9, the tria! court issued an order dec!aring the fo!!owing, to the e"c!usion of a!! others, as the INTESTATE HEIRS OF THE 5ECEASE5 VITO ORRO!EO 6 +ose #uenco Borromeo, +udge #rispin Borromeo, Vita!iana Borromeo, /atrocinio Borromeo 0errera, .a!ud Borromeom $suncion Borromeo, Marcia! Borromeom $me!inda Borromeo de &a!am, and, &he heirs of #anuto Borromeo. - &he court a!so ordered that the assets of the intestate estate of Vito Borromeo sha!! e divided into 129 and 529 groups and distriuted in e*ua! and e*uita!e shares among the 9 dec!ared intestate heirs. %n $ugust 25, 1932, respondent FORT#NATO ORRO!EO fi!ed a motion to e dec!ared as one of the heirs of the deceased, a!!eging that he is an i!!egitimate son and that he was omitted in the dec!aration of heirs. - $s an ac4now!edged i!!egitimate chi!d, he stated that he was entit!ed to a !egitime e*ua! in every case to four5fifths of the !egitime of an ac4now!edged natura! chi!d. - 'inding that the motion of 'ortunato Borromeo was a!ready arred y the order of the court dated $pri! 1-, 19,9, the court dismissed the motion. 'ortunato fi!ed a motion for reconsideration. 6n the memorandum he sumitted, 'ortunato changed the asis for his c!aim to a portion of the estate. 0e asserted and incorporated a 7AIVER OF HERE5ITAR8 RIGHTS 97:31:19;7<. 6n the waiver, five of the nine heirs re!in*uished to 'ortunato their shares in the disputed estate. "ETITIONER=S CONTENTION6 &he tria! court, acting as a proate court, had no 7urisdiction to ta4e cogni8ance of the c!aim9 'ortunato is estopped from asserting the waiver agreement9 that the waiver agreement is void as it was e"ecuted efore the dec!aration of heirs9 that the same is void having een e"ecuted efore the distriution of the estate and efore the acceptance of the inheritance9 and that it is void ab initio and ine"istent for !ac4 of su7ect matter. - &he :;aiver of 0ereditary <ights: has een cance!!ed and revo4ed on +une 29, 19,8, y &omas =. Borromeo, 'ortunato Borromeo and $me!ia Borromeo, is without force and effect ecause there can e no effective waiver of hereditary rights efore there has een a va!id acceptance of the inheritance the heirs intend to transfer. /ursuant to $rtic!e 1-13 of the #ivi! #ode, to ma4e acceptance or repudiation of inheritance va!id, the person must e certain of the death of the one from whom he is to inherit and of his right to the inheritance. .ince the petitioner and her co5heirs were not certain of their right to the inheritance unti! they were dec!ared heirs, their rights were, therefore, uncertain. RES"ON5ENT=S CONTENTION> ?nder $rtic!e 1-13 of the #ivi! #ode there is no need for a person to e first dec!ared as heir efore he can accept or repudiate an inheritance. ;hat is re*uired is that he must first e certain of the death of the person from whom he is to inherit and that he must e certain of his right to the inheritance. 0e points out that at the time of the signing of the waiver document on +u!y 31, 19,3, the signatories to the waiver document were certain that Vito Borromeo was a!ready dead as we!! as of their rights to the inheritance as shown in the waiver document itse!f. %n @ecemer 21, 1931, the tria! court conc!uding that the five dec!ared heirs who signed the waiver agreement assigning their hereditary rights to 'ortunato Borromeo had !ost the same rights, dec!ared the !atter as entit!ed to 529 of the estate of Vito Borromeo. ISS#E> ;hether or not the ;aiver of 0ereditary <ights e"ecuted in 3231219,3 is va!id as to entit!e 'ortunato to the estate of VitoA R#LING6 &he heirs cou!d waive their hereditary rights in 19,3 even if the order to partition the estate was issued on!y in 19,9. - 6n O.o,-o 4. O.o,-o and 8%/+$u.*- S*($>.+-3 Co., the #ourt he!d> &he properties inc!uded in an e"isting inheritance cannot e considered as e!onging to third persons with respect to the heirs, who y fiction of !aw continue the persona!ity of the former. Bor do such properties have the character of future property, ecause the +(-,. $/?u-,( $ ,-'+* *o .u//(..-o% ),o> *+( >o>(%* o) *+( &($*+ o) *+( &(/($.(& ($rtic!e ,53 and app!ied y $rtic!e ,,1), *+( +(-,. .u//((& *+( &(/($.(& 0y *+( >(,( )$/* o) &($*+. More or !ess, time may e!apse from the moment of the death of the deceased unti! the heirs enter into possession of the hereditary property, 0u* *+( $//(3*$%/( -% $%y (4(%* ,(*,o$/*. *o *+( >o>(%* o) *+( &($*+ ($rtic!e 989). T+( ,-'+* -. 4(.*(&, $l*+ou'+ /o%&-*-o%(& u3o% *+( $&@u&-/$*-o% o) *+( /o,,(.3o%&-%' +(,(&-*$,y 3o,*-o%. 0owever, the purported :;aiver of 0ereditary <ights: cannot e considered to e effective. - 'or a waiver to e"ist, three e!ements are essentia!> (1) the e"istence of a right9 (2) the 4now!edge of the e"istence thereof9 and (3) an intention to re!in*uish such right. - &he intention to waive a right or advantage must e shown c!ear!y and convincing!y, and when the on!y proof of intention rests in what a party does, his act shou!d e so manifest!y consistent with, and indicative of an intent to, vo!untari!y re!in*uish the particu!ar right or advantage that no other reasona!e e"p!anation of his conduct is possi!e. &he circumstances of this case that the signatories to the waiver document did not have the c!ear and convincing intention to re!in*uish their rights, &hus> - (1) %n %ctoer 23, 19,3, 'ortunato, &omas, and $me!ia Borromeo fi!ed a p!eading entit!ed :#omp!iance: wherein they sumitted a proposa! for the amica!e sett!ement of the case. 6n this document, the respondent recogni8es and concedes that the petitioner is an heir of the deceased Vito Borromeo, entit!ed to share in the estate. &his shows that the :;aiver of 0ereditary <ights: was never meant to e what the respondent purports it to e. 0ad the intent een otherwise, there wou!d not e any reason for 'ortunato, &omas, and $me!ia Borromeo to mention the heirs in the offer to sett!e the case amica!y, and offer to concede to them parts of the estate of the deceased - (2) %n $pri! 21 and 3-, 19,9, the ma7ority of the dec!ared heirs e"ecuted an $greement on how the estate they inherited sha!! e distriuted. &he $greement of /artition was approved y the tria! court on $ugust 15, 19,9. - (3) %n +une 29, 19,8, the petitioner signed a document entit!ed @eed of $ssignment purporting to transfer and assign in favor of the respondent and &omas and $me!ia Borromeo a!! her (/atrocinio B. 0erreraCs) rights, interests, and participation as an intestate heir in the estate of the deceased Vito Borromeo. - (1) %n +une 29, 19,8, the respondent &omas, and $me!ia Borromeo (assignees in the deed of assignment) in turn e"ecuted a @eed of <econveyance in favor of the heirs5assignors named in the same deed of assignment. &he stated consideration was /5-,---.--9 - (5) $ #ance!!ation of @eed of $ssignment and @eed of <econveyance was signed y &omas Borromeo and $me!ia Borromeo on %ctoer 15, 19,8, whi!e 'ortunato Borromeo signed this document on March 21, 19,9. ISS#E OF J#RIS5ICTION> &he tria! court had 7urisdiction to pass upon the va!idity of the waiver agreement. 6n .pecia! /roceedings Bo. 91,5< the !ower court disa!!owed the proate of the wi!! and dec!ared it as fa4e. ?pon appea!, the #ourt affirmed the decision of the !ower court. .use*uent!y, severa! parties came efore the !ower court fi!ing c!aims or petitions a!!eging themse!ves as heirs of the intestate estate of Vito Borromeo. &here is no impediment to the tria! court in e"ercising 7urisdiction and trying the said c!aims or petitions. Moreover, the 7urisdiction of the tria! court e"tends to matters incidenta! and co!!atera! to the e"ercise of its recogni8ed powers in hand!ing the sett!ement of the estate. ACO!!ENT6 Bwisit Dtong case na Dto. $ng haaEtapos 4onti !ang ung 4ai!angan. /ero to summari8e the cases that were conso!idated> (1) F.<. Bo. 111319 (2) F.<. Bo. 55---> 6ssues are simi!ar to the issues raised in F.<. Bo. 111319 the supposed waiver of hereditary rights cannot e va!idated. &he essentia! e!ements of a waiver, especia!!y the c!ear and convincing intention to re!in*uish hereditary rights, are not found in this case9 (3) F.<. Bo. ,2895> 'or the termination and c!osure of .pecia! /roceedings Bo. 91,5<9 pending motions to compe! petition as co5administrator to sumit an inventory9 (1) F.<. Bo. ,5995> Matter of attorneyCs fees9 (5) F.<. Bo. ,3818> <espondents +ose #uenco Borromeo and /etra %. Borromeo fi!ed a motion for inhiition in the #'6 of #eu, presided over y +udge 'rancisco /. Burgos to inhiit the 7udge from further acting in .pecia! /roceedings Bo. 91,5<9 (,) F.<. Bo. ,5995> &he petitioners see4 to restrain the respondents from further acting on any and a!! incidents in .pecia! /roceedings Bo. 91,5< during the pendency of this petition and Bo. ,3818.B