SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS Rule 74 – Summary Settlement of Estate

LIST OF CASES
ATTY. ESCOLIN Partition but joinder of causes of action (IPE)
2ND SEMESTER, A.Y. 2020-2021 • Copioso vs. Copioso, 391 SCRA 325, October 28, 2002
TOPICS:
- Rules 72-109 Declaration of nullity, partition an incidental action (IPE)
- Domestic Adoption; Inter-country Adoption (A.M. 02-6-02-SC) • Russell vs. Vestil, 304 SCRA 738, March 17, 1999
- Child Legally Available for Adoption process (R.A. 9523)
- Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus in relation to Custody of Minors (A.M. 03-04-04- Section 1 – Extrajudicial settlement by agreement between heirs
SC) Oral partition
- Writ of Amparo (A.M. 07-9-12-SC)
• Hernandez vs. Andal, 78 Phil. 196, March 29, 1947
- Writ of Habeas Data (A.M. 08-1-16-SC)

Proper remedy: Ordinary action of partition

General Provision
• Torres vs. Torres, 10 SCRA 185, January 31, 1964
Rule 72 – Subject Matter and Applicability of General Rules
Extrajudicial settlement not binding to those who did not receive notice (no notice before
Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons agreement)
• Cua vs. Vargas, 506 SCRA 374, October 31, 2006
Rule 73 – Venue and Process
Section 4 – Liabilities of distributes and estate
CIVPRO CASES: Prescriptive period under R74 S4, 2 conditions
No allegation in the petition of the gross value; Jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of Buyer in bad faith:
proceedings • Sampilo and Salacup vs. Court of Appeals and Sinopera, 103 Phil. 70, February 28,
• Frianela vs. Banayad, Jr., 594 SCRA 380, July 30, 2009, Ponente: Nachura; Third 1958
Division* Buyer in good faith:
Recovery of sum of money; Damages merely consequences of main action – Actual damages • Carreon vs. Agcaoili, 1 SCRA 521, February 23, 1961
only
• Soliven vs. Fastforms Philippines, Inc., 440 SCRA 389, October 18, 2004 Rule 75 – Production of Will. Allowance of Will Necessary
In re Estoppel compare with:
• Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29, April 15, 1968 Probate of a will is a proceeding in rem
• Manalo vs. Paredes and Philippine Food Co., 47 Phil., 938, September 22, 1925
Waiver of jurisdiction • (Criminal action) Mercado vs. Santos and Daza, 66 Phil. 215, September 22, 1938
• Uriarte vs. Court of First Instance of Negros Occ., 33 SCRA 252, May 29, 1970
• Cuenco vs. Court of Appeals, 53 SCRA 360, October 26, 1973

Where estate settled when spouses are both deceased

• Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank vs. Escolin, 56 SCRA 265, March 29,
1974
Resolution: Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank vs. Escolin, 67 SCRA
202, September 30, 1975

Jurisdiction of probate court to entertain issues of title

• Bernardo vs. Court of Appeals, 7 SCRA 367, February 28, 1963

ATTY ESCOLIN – SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST OF CASES 2021 | LAGMAN 1

Rule 76 – Allowance or Disallowance of Will Rule 79 – Opposing Issuance of Letters Testamentary, Petition and Contest for Letters of
Administration
Effect if there is lack of interest on the person who urged the petition for probate of will
• Paras vs. Narciso., 35 Phil., 244, November 02, 1916 Rule 80 – Special Administration

Section 6 –Proof of lost or destroyed will. Certificate thereupon Publication requirement; jurisdictional
Holographic will • De Guzman vs. Angeles, 162 SCRA 347, June 20, 1988
• Gan vs. Yap, G.R. No. L-12190, August 30, 1958
• Rodelas vs. Aranza, 119 SCRA 16, December 07, 1982 Rule 81– Bond of Executors and Administrators

Intrinsic validity Rule 82– Revocation of Administration, Death, Resignation, and Removal of Executors or
• Balanay, Jr. vs. Martinez, 64 SCRA 452, June 27, 1975 Administrators
• Nuguid vs. Nuguid, et al., 17 SCRA 449, June 23, 1966
Section 1 - Administration revoked if will discovered. Proceedings thereupon
Disinheritance; determine extrinsic validity first. When is letters of administration previously issued deemed revoked
• Maninang vs. Court of Appeals, 114 SCRA 478, June 19, 1982 (J. Melencio-Herrera) • Advincula vs. Teodoro, Sr. etc. and Lacson, 99 Phil. 413, May 31, 1956

Probate court has no right to determine with finality of ownership Grounds for removal of administrator
• Ortega vs. Court of Appeals, 245 SCRA 529, July 03, 1995 • Gonzales vs. Aguinaldo, 190 SCRA 112, September 28, 1990
• Gabriel vs. Court of Appeals, 212 SCRA 413, August 07, 1992 (J. Regalado)
Intrinsic validity
• Nepomuceno vs. Court of Appeals, 139 SCRA 206, October 09, 1985 Issue is not anymore as to question or preference but as to whether removal is proper
• De Parreño vs. Aranzanso, 116 SCRA 157, August 30, 1982
Evidence of forgery allowed even if not raised as a ground
• Vaño vs. Vda. de Garces, et al, 95 Phil. 333, June 30, 1954
Rule 83– Inventory and Appraisal. Provision for Support of Family
Effect of dismissal/ withdrawal of petition for probate
• De Arroyo vs. Abay, 4 SCRA 555, February 28, 1962 Children who are of age not disqualified – allowance under CC/ FC
• Miraflores vs. Mesa Magsuci, et al., 105 Phil. 1284, April 29, 1959 • Santero vs. CFI of Cavite, 153 SCRA 728, September 14, 1987

Rule 77 – Allowance of Will Proved Outside of Philippines and Administration of Estate Disallowance for support
Thereunder • Moore & Sons Mercantile Co. vs. Wagner, 50 Phil. 128, March 18, 1927

Additional requirements for re-probate of a will Grandchildren NOT entitled to provisional support
• Suntay vs. Suntay, 95 Phil., 500, July 31, 1954 • Estate of Hilario M. Ruiz vs. Court of Appeals, 252 SCRA 541, January 29, 1996
• Fluemer vs. Hix, 54 Phil. 610, March 17, 1930
Allowance for support to minor children
Rule 78 – Letters Testamentary and of Administration, When and To Whom Issued • Lesaca vs. Lesaca, 91 Phil. 135, April 21, 1952

Preference in appointment applies only to regular administrator (not special) Rule 84– General Powers and Duties of Executors and Administrators
• Tan vs. Gedorio, Jr., 548 SCRA 528, March 14, 2008
Rule 85 – Accountability and Compensation of Executors and Administrators

Award for attorney’s fees

• Sato vs. Rallos, 12 SCRA 84, September 30, 1964

ATTY ESCOLIN – SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST OF CASES 2021 | LAGMAN 2

 LIQUIDATION Rule 87 – Execution By and Against Executors and Administrators
Rule 86 – Claims Against Estate
Injury against property (not within statute of non-claims)
• Aguas vs. Llemos, 5 SCRA 959, August 30, 1962
Section 2 – Time within which claims shall be filed
3 requirements (e.g., parties interested are ALL heirs of deceased), with option to submit the issue of ownership
When 1 month will start in “within a time not exceeding one (1) month” • Bernardo vs. Court of Appeals, 7 SCRA 367, February 28, 1963, supra

Probate court decision as to ownership, merely provisional in nature (XPN: Bernardo v. CA)
First set of jurisprudence
• Ortega vs. Court of Appeals, 153 SCRA 96, August 14, 1987
• The lntestate Estate of Dominador Danan vs. Buencamino, 110 SCRA
352, December 14, 1981 Money claim arising from contract (RTC jurisdiction – specific performance)
• Edmands vs. Philippine Trust Co., 87 Phil. 405, September 29, 1950 • Circa Nila Development Corporation vs. Baylen, 157 SCRA 609, January 29, 1988

Probate court jurisdiction; cannot order surrender of property

Second set of jurisprudence
• Cuizon vs. Ramolete, 129 SCRA 495, May 29, 1984
• In the Matter of the Intestate Estate of Alfredo Aquino Sr., deceased. MATILDE V.
AQUINO, administratrix. TEODORO S. PAULIN, claimant and appellant, vs. Jurisdiction of probate court is not merely jurisdiction per se BUT is a merely procedural matter
MATILDE V. AQUINO, ET AL., oppositors and appellees., 103 Phil. 1107, March 20, Also in relation to Section 6 - Proceedings when property concealed, embezzled, or fraudulently conveyed
1958 • Valera vs. Inserto, 149 SCRA 533, May 07, 1987
• Guanco vs. National Bank, 54 Phil. 244, January 14, 1930
• Quisumbing vs. Guison, 76 Phil. 730, May 31, 1946
HOW TO PAY
Section 5 - Claims which must be filed under the notice. If not filed, barred; exceptions. Rule 88 – Payment of the Debts of the Estate

“Implied contract” HOW TO LIQUIDATE

Rule 89 – Sales, Mortgages, and Other Encumbrances of Property of Decedent
• Maclan vs. Garcia, 97 Phil. 119, May 27, 1955 (J. Concepcion)
S4 & S7 of R89 are mandatory requirements
Money claim (obligation) arising from law (taxes) • Boñaga vs. Soler, 2 SCRA 755, June 30, 1961
• Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Pamintuan, 55 Phil. 13, October 11, 1930
Non-compliance with notice requirement (minor children)
• Maneclang vs. Baun, 208 SCRA 179, April 22, 1992
Money claim not filed on time
• Villanueva vs. Ramos, 161 SCRA 363, May 21, 1988 Additional requirement
• Manotok Realty, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 149 SCRA 372, April 30, 1987
Money claim arises from employer-employee relationship, probate court has jurisdiction
• Robledo vs. National Labor Relations Commission, 238 SCRA 52, November 09, DISTRIBUTION
Rule 90 – Distribution and Partition of the Estate
1994
• Ortega vs. Court of Appeals, 153 SCRA 96, August 14, 1987 (supra)
Contingent • J. Cruz case on involuntary recognition
• Buan and Paras vs. Laya, et al., 102 Phil. 682, December 24, 1957 • Valera vs. Inserto, 149 SCRA 533, May 07, 1987 (supra)
• Circa Nila Development Corporation vs. Baylen, 157 SCRA 609, January 29, 1988 (supra)
Filing of claim with probate court for issuance of letters is equivalent to action for revival of
Shares of stock in custodia legis
judgment • Lee vs. Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Br. 85, 423 SCRA 497, February 23, 2004
• Phil. National Bank vs. Vda. de Villarin, 66 SCRA 590, September 05, 1975
Agreement invalid because no order of distribution yet
Section 6 – Solidary obligation of decedent • Union Bank of the Philippines vs. Santibañez, 452 SCRA 228, February 23, 2005
• Jaucian vs. Querol., 38 Phil. 707, October 05, 1918
When probate court loses jurisdiction
• Timbol vs. Cano, 1 SCRA 1271, April 29, 1961
Section 7 – Mortgage debt due from estate • Solivio vs. Court of Appeals, 182 SCRA 119, February 12, 1990
• Vda. de Jacob vs. Court of Appeals, 184 SCRA 294, April 06, 1990

ATTY ESCOLIN – SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST OF CASES 2021 | LAGMAN 3

Rule 91 – Escheats Rule 98 – Trustees

Unclaimed Balances Law Rule 101 – Proceedings for Hospitalization of Insane Persons
• Republic vs. CFI of Manila, Branch XIII, 165 SCRA 11, August 30, 1988
Rule 103 – Change of Name
Procedure prescribed under rules on escheat is jurisdictional
• De Guzman vs. Sevilla, 47 Phil. 991, August 30, 1924 Absence of name sought to be adopted in the title of petition
• Divino vs. Hilario and Municipality of Guianga, 62 Phil. 926, January 24, 1936 • Republic vs. Zosa, 165 SCRA 292, September 12, 1988
• Negros Occidental Municipalities of Magallon, Isabela andLa Castellana vs. Bezore,
et al., 109 Phil. 829, October 26, 1960 Absence of aliases in the title of the petition
• Republic vs. Marcos, 182 SCRA 223, February 15, 1990
Rule 91 – Escheats
Good reason
Unclaimed Balances Law • Republic vs. Court of Appeals, 209 SCRA 189, May 21, 1992 (J. Regalado)
• Republic vs. CFI of Manila, Branch XIII, 165 SCRA 11, August 30, 1988
Rule 104 – Voluntary Dissolution of Corporations
Procedure prescribed under rules on escheat is jurisdictional
• De Guzman vs. Sevilla, 47 Phil. 991, August 30, 1924 Rule 105 – Judicial Approval of Voluntary Recognition of Minor Natural Children
• Divino vs. Hilario and Municipality of Guianga, 62 Phil. 926, January 24, 1936 • Angeles vs. Maglaya, 469 SCRA 363, September 02, 2005 (Evidence case)
• Negros Occidental Municipalities of Magallon, Isabela andLa Castellana vs. Bezore,
et al., 109 Phil. 829, October 26, 1960 Rule 106 – Constitution of Family Home

Rule 107 – Absentees

RTC decisions on special proceedings are final & executory (not appealable)
• Republic vs. Bermudez-Lorino, 449 SCRA 57, January 19, 2005

Rule 108 – Cancellation or Correction of Entries in the Civil Registry

Petition for correction of entry (citizenship), not allowed (ROC < CC)
• Chiao Ben Lim vs. Zosa, 146 SCRA 366, December 29, 1986

Adversarial
• Republic vs. Valencia, 141 SCRA 462, March 05, 1986

No physical defect
• Silverio vs. Republic, 537 SCRA 373, October 19, 2007

With physical defect

• Republic vs. Cagandahan, 565 SCRA 72, September 12, 2008

Indispensable party NOT impleaded; cured by publication

• Republic vs. Coseteng-Magpayo, 641 SCRA 533, February 02, 2011

ATTY ESCOLIN – SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST OF CASES 2021 | LAGMAN 4

 General Guardians and Guardianship Rule 102 – Habeas Corpus
• Enrile vs. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217, June 05, 1990
Constructive restraint
In relation to: A.M. No. 03-02-05-SC (minors)
• Villavicencio vs. Lukban., 39 Phil., 778, March 25, 1919
Rules 92 – 97 (incompetent)
Actual effect of psychological spell
Rule 92 – Venue • Caunca vs. Salazar, 82 Phil., 851, January 01, 1949

Constructive restraint
Rule 93 – Appointment of Guardians
• Moncupa vs. Enrile, 141 SCRA 233, January 30, 1986

Rule 94 – Bonds of Guardians Immigration cases

• Fun vs. El Secretario de Trabajo., 67 Phil. 394, January 18, 1939
Rule 95 – Selling and Encumbering Property of Ward • Lao Tang Bun vs. Fabre, 81 Phil. 682, October 22, 1948

Legality of an order of confinement

Rule 96 – General Powers and Duties of Guardians
• Comendador vs. De Villa, 200 SCRA 80, August 02, 1991

Rule 97 – Termination of Guardianship How jurisdiction acquired

• Saulo vs. Brig. Gen. Pelagio Cruz etc., 105 Phil. 315, March 19, 1959
Jurisdiction of Guardianship Court
A.M. 07-9-12-SC – Writ of Amparo
• Cui vs. Piccio, et al., 91 Phil. 712, July 31, 1952
Section 1 – Petition
Property right
• Canlas vs. Napico Homeowners Ass'n., I-XIII, Inc., 554 SCRA 208, June 05, 2008
Rule 99 – Adoption and Custody of Minors Forget about this Rule! • Tapuz vs. Del Rosario, 554 SCRA 768, June 17, 2008
• Castillo vs. Cruz, 605 SCRA 628, November 25, 2009
A.M. 02-6-02-SC (New Rule on Adoption); R.A. 9523 (Child legally available for adoption) 3 rights + scope
- Domestic Adoption • Reyes vs. Court of Appeals, 606 SCRA 580, December 03, 2009

Rule 100 – Rescission and Revocation of Adoption Forget about this Rule! Writ of amparo proper!
• Secretary of National Defense vs. Manalo, 568 SCRA 1, October 07, 2008
A.M. 02-6-02-SC (New Rule on Adoption)
A.M. 08-1-16-SC – Writ of Habeas Data
- Rescission & Revocation of Adoption
- Inter-country adoption Indigent
• Acar, et al. vs. Rosal, 19 SCRA 625, March 18, 1967
R.A. 9523 (Child legally available for adoption)
Substantive rights
• Fabian vs. Desierto, 295 SCRA 470, September 16, 1998
A.M. 03-04-04-SC (Rule on Custody of Minors and Writ of Habeas Corpus in relation to
Custody of Minors) Rule 109 – Appeals in Special Proceedings
[CIVPRO CASES]
Multiple appeals
• Miranda vs. Court of Appeals, 71 SCRA 295, June 18, 1976
• Briones vs. Henson-Cruz, August 22, 2008

Not in all cases where it is multi-tiered that the appeal in all these stages must be by record on appeal
Expropriation case
• Marinduque Mining and Industrial Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 567 SCRA 483, October 06,
2008
Petition for cancellation of birth record and change of surname in the civil registry
• Republic vs. Nishina, 634 SCRA 716, November 15, 2010

• Republic vs. Bermudez-Lorino, 449 SCRA 57, January 19, 2005 (supra)

ATTY ESCOLIN – SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS LIST OF CASES 2021 | LAGMAN 5