SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS MIDTERM EXAM

1. What is the subject matter of special proceedings? How are Rules of Civil Actions
Applied in Special Proceedings cases?

2. Emily died single. She left all her properties by will to her friend April.. In the will, Emily
stated that she did not recognize Michael as an adopted son because of his
disrespectful conduct towards her. April soon instituted an action for probate of Emily’s
will. Michael on the other hand, instituted intestate proceedings. Both actions were
consolidated before the RTC of Pasig. On motion of Michael, April’s petition was
ordered dismissed on the ground that the will is void for depriving him of his legitime.
Was the Court’s Dismissal proper?
UGGESTED ANSWER: The petition for probate of Czarina‟s will, as filed by Duquesa should
not be dismissed on mere motion of Marco who instituted intestate proceedings. The law
favors testacy over intestacy, hence, the probate of the will cannot be dispensed with. (See
Sec. 5, Rule 75) Thus, unless the will – which shows the obvious intent to disinherit Marco –
is probated, the right of a person to dispose of his property may be rendered nugatory (See
Seanio vs. Reyes, G.R. Nos. 140371-72, Nov. 27, 2006). Besides, the authority of the probate
court is generally limited only to a determination of

3. Gloria filed a suit with the RTC of Pasay against Chito and/or Estate of Chito for
reconveyance of a lot declared in the name of Chito under TCT No. R-76543. The
complaint alleged that "on account Chito's residence abroad up to the present and the
uncertainty of whether he is still alive or dead, he or his estate may be served with
summons by publication." Summons was published and nobody filed any responsive
pleading within sixty (60) days therefrom. Upon motion, defendants were declared in
default and judgment was rendered declaring Gloria as legal owner and ordering
defendants to reconvey said lot to Gloria.
Emma, the court-designated administrator of Chito’s estate, filed a petition for
annulment of judgment before the CA praying that the decision in favor of Gloria be
declared null and void for lack of jurisdiction. She claims that the action filed by Gloria is
an action in personam and that the court did not acquire jurisdiction over defendants
Chito and/or his estate. On the other hand, Gloria claims that the suit is an action in
rem or at least an action quasi in rem. Is the RTC judge correct in ordering service of
summons by publication? Explain

4. Cecille, a Fil-Am permanent resident of Los Angeles, California at the time of his death,
bequeathed to Clarisse a sum of money to purchase an annuity. Upon Cecille’s
demise, her will was duly probated in Los Angeles and the specified sum in the will was
in fact used to purchase an annuity with XYZ of Hong Kong so that Clarisse would
receive the equivalent of US$1,000 per month for the next 15 years. Wanting to receive
the principal amount of the annuity, Clarisse files for the probate of Cecille’s will in the
Makati RTC. As prayed for, the court names Clarisse as administrator of the estate.
Clarisse now files in the Makati RTC a motion to compel XYZ to account for all sums in
its possession forming part of Cecille’s estate. Rule on the motion.

The motion should be denied. Makati RTC has no jurisdiction over XYZ of hongkong. The letters of
administration granted to Winston only covers all Pedrillo‟s estate in the Philippines. (Rule 77, Sec. 4)
This cannot cover the annuities in Hongkong. At the outset, Makati RTC should not have taken
cognizance of the petition filed by Winston, because the will does not cover any property of Pedrillo
located here in the Philippines.

been established. The publication of the settlement does not constitute constructive notice to the heirs
who had no knowledge or did not take part in it because the same was notice after the fact of
execution. The requirement of publication is intended for the protection of creditors and was never
intended to deprive heirs of their lawful participation in the decedent‟s estate. She can file the action
therefor within four (4) years after the settlement was registered.
 5. Joycelyn died intestate, leaving a P1 billion estate. He was survived by her husband
Mario and their five children. Mario filed a petition for the issuance of letters of
administration. Kara, one of the children, filed an opposition to the petition, alleging that
there was neither an allegation nor genuine effort to settle the estate amicably before
the filing of the petition. Rule on the opposition.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: The opposition should be overruled for lack of merit. The
allegation that there was a genuine effort to settle the estate amicably before the filing
of the petition is not required by the Rules. Besides, a petition for issuance of letters of
administration may be contested on either of two grounds : (1) the incompetency of the
person for whom letters are prayed therein; and (2) the contestant‟s own right to the
administration. (Sec. 4, Rule 9).

6. Verna and Genesis lived without benefit of marriage for 20 years, during which time
they purchased properties together. After Verna died without a will, Genesis filed a
petition for letters of administration. Verna’s siblings opposed the same on the ground
that Genesis has no legal personality. Decide.

A petition for letters of administration may be filed by any “interested person” (Sec. 2,
Rule 79, Rules of Court). Gen would be considered an interested person if she was not
married to Domenico, because she can claim co-ownership of the properties left by him
under their property regime of a union without marriage under conditions provided in
the Family Code 9Arts. 147-148, Family Code; San Luis vs. San Luis, G.R. No.
133743, February 6, 2007).

7. Ruben, a resident of Antipolo City, Rizal died leaving an estate located in Manila, worth
P200,000.00. In what court, taking into consideration the nature of jurisdiction and of
venue, should the probate proceeding on the estate of Ruben be instituted?
The probate proceeding on the estate of A should be instituted in the Municipal Trial Court of
Malolos, Bulacan which has jurisdiction, because the estate is valued at P200,000.00, and is
the court of proper venue because A was a resident of Malolos at the time of his death. (Sec.
33 of BP 129 as amended by RA 7691; Sec. 1 of Rule 73)

8. Michael Lopez, Filipino, 42 years old, married, and residing at Valley Golf and Country
Club Subdivision, Antipolo City, Rizal of sound mind, executed a last will and
testament in English, a language spoken and written by him proficiently. He disposed of
his estate consisting of a parcel of land in Makati City and cash deposit at the City Bank
in the sum of P 150 Million. He bequeathed P 30 Million each to his 3 sons and P 60
Million to his wife. He devised a piece of land worth P10 Million to Sarah, his favorite
daughter-inlaw. He named his best friend, Joseph , as executor of the will without bond.
Is Joseph, after learning of 's death, obliged to file with the proper court a petition of
probate of the latter's last will and testament?
Cancio Vidal is obliged to file a petition for probate and for accepting or refusing the trust within the statutory
period of 20 days under Sec. 3, Rule 75, Rules of Court.

a. Supposing the original copy of the last will and testament was lost, can Joseph
compel Sarah to produce a copy in her possession to be submitted to the probate
court.
: Yes, Cancio can compel Susan to produce the copy in her possession. A person having custody
of the will is bound to deliver the same to the court of competent jurisdiction or to the executor, as
provided in Sec. 2, Rule 75, Rules of Court.

9. An heir/oppositor in a probate proceeding filed a motion to remove the administrator on

the grounds of neglect of duties as administrator and absence from the country. On his
part the heir/oppositor served written interrogatories to the administrator preparatory to
 presenting the latter as a witness. The administrator objected, insisting that the modes
of discovery apply only to ordinary civil actions, not special proceedings. Rule on the
matter
No, the administrator is not correct. Modes of discovery apply also to special proceedings. Sec. 2, Rule
72 states that in the absence of special provisions, the rules provided for in ordinary actions shall be, as
far as practicable, applicable in special proceedings.

10. The heirs of Marilyn agree among themselves that they will honor the division of
Marilyn’s estate as indicated in her Last Will and Testament. To avoid the expense of
going to court in a Petition for Probate of the Will, can they instead execute an
Extrajudicial Settlement Agreement among themselves? Explain briefly.

he heirs of H cannot validly agree to resort to extrajudicial settlement of his estate and do away with the
probate of H‟s last will and testament. Probate of the will is mandatory (Guevarra v. Guevarra, 74 Phil.
479 [1943]). The policy of the law is to respect the will of the testator as manifested in the other
dispositions in his last will and testament, insofar as they are not contrary to law, public morals and
public policy. Extrajudicial settlement of an estate of a deceased is allowed only when the deceased left
no last will and testament and all debts, if any, are paid (Rule 74, Sec. 1, Rules of Court).

11. In a probate or intestate proceeding, can the Court decide on the matter of
ownership of the properties? Decide with legal basis.

12. Does the presence of unauthenticated alterations, cancellations or insertions

invalidate the will?