0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)
26 vizualizări3 pagini
1. The document discusses a case regarding a dispute over guardianship of a minor whose deceased father was allegedly a member of the U.S. armed forces.
2. The U.S. Veterans' Administrator filed motions arguing the minor was not entitled to insurance benefits and sought refund of benefits already paid, claiming the father did not have valid military service.
3. The court denied the motions, finding that the question of the father's military service must be determined in a separate proceeding, as the Administrator was acting as a litigant and not entitled to final decisions as if a judge.
1. The document discusses a case regarding a dispute over guardianship of a minor whose deceased father was allegedly a member of the U.S. armed forces.
2. The U.S. Veterans' Administrator filed motions arguing the minor was not entitled to insurance benefits and sought refund of benefits already paid, claiming the father did not have valid military service.
3. The court denied the motions, finding that the question of the father's military service must be determined in a separate proceeding, as the Administrator was acting as a litigant and not entitled to final decisions as if a judge.
1. The document discusses a case regarding a dispute over guardianship of a minor whose deceased father was allegedly a member of the U.S. armed forces.
2. The U.S. Veterans' Administrator filed motions arguing the minor was not entitled to insurance benefits and sought refund of benefits already paid, claiming the father did not have valid military service.
3. The court denied the motions, finding that the question of the father's military service must be determined in a separate proceeding, as the Administrator was acting as a litigant and not entitled to final decisions as if a judge.
In Re Guardianship of the Minor Roy Reginald Lelina. SEVERO
VILORIA , guardian- oppositor- appellee, vs . ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS AFFAIRS , petitioner-appellant.
Stanley A. Clark for appellant.
Tancredo M. Guray for appellee.
SYLLABUS
1. WAR CLAIMS; WHEN DECISION OF U.S. VETERANS' ADMINISTRATOR
FINAL AND CONCLUSIVE; CASE AT BAR. — The provisions of the U. S. Code make the decisions of U.S. Veterans Administrator final and conclusive when made on claims properly submitted to him for resolution; but they are not applicable to cases where, as the one at bar, the Administrator is not acting as a Judge but as a litigant. There is a great difference between actions against the Administrator (which must be filed strictly in accordance with the conditions that are imposed by the Veterans' Act, including the exclusive review by United States courts), and those actions where the Veterans' Administrator seeks a remedy from the Philippine courts and submits to their jurisdiction by filing action therein. If the findings of the Veterans' Administrator, in actions where he is a party, are made conclusive on the Philippine courts, that, in effect, will deprive the Philippine tribunals of judicial discretion and render them mere subordinate instrumentalities of the Veterans' Administrator. 2. GUARDIANSHIP PROCEEDINGS; CONFLICT OF TITLE TO PROPERTY WHERE TO BE LITIGATED. — Conflicts regarding ownership or title to the property in the hands of the guardian, in his capacity as such, should be litigated in a separate proceeding.
DECISION
REYES , J.B.L. , J : p
In Special Proceedings No. 163 of the Court of First Instance of La Union,
appellee Severo Viloria was, on October 27, 1948, appointed guardian of the person and estate of the minor Roy Reginald Lelina, bene ciary of arrears in pay, insurance, and other bene ts from the U. S. Veterans Administration due to the death of his late father Constancio Lelina, supposedly a member of the U. S. Armed Forces during the war. On March 31, 1950, the court authorized the guardian to withdraw from the estate of his ward the sum of not to exceed P30 a month for the boy's support and other expenditures.
On March 20, 1952, the U. S. Veterans Administration led a motion in the
In the matter of guardianship of FERNANDO, FRANCISCA, RAFAEL and MARIA CANDELARIA, all surnamed BAUTISTA, minors. FELISA PANGILINAN VDA. DE BAUTISTA, guardian. UNITED STATES VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, oppositor-appellee,.docx
Judge Thomas Cecil Systemic Lawbreaking Admission: Whistleblower Leaked Court Reporter Transcript Family Code Case Management Law Illegally Used in Sacramento Superior Court by Part-Time Judge Attorneys - Judge Jame Mize Sacramento County Judge Robert Hight - Third District Court of Appeal Sacramento Justice Vance Raye - California Supreme Court - Commission on Judicial Performance Director Victoria B. Henley - Judicial Council of California Chair Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye
California Judicial Branch News Service - Investigative Reporting Source Material & Story Ideas
Rafael Usatorres and Lidia Usatorres, His Wife v. Marina Mercante Nicaraguenses, S.A. D/B/A Mamenic Line, A Foreign Corporation, 768 F.2d 1285, 11th Cir. (1985)