Gonzales v. Court of Appeals
G.R. No. 117740, October 30, 1998
FACTS:
On 18 April1972, petitioners Carolina Abad Gonzales, Dolores de Mesa Abad and Cesar de Mesa Tioseco sought the settlement of the intestate estate of their brother, Ricardo de Mesa Abad. In their petition, petitioners claimed that they were the only heirs of their brother as he had allegedly died a bachelor, leaving no descendants or ascendants, whether legitimate or illegitimate. Petitioners amended their petition by alleging that the real properties listed as belonging to the decedent were actually only administered by him and that the true owner was their late mother, Lucila de Mesa.
The trial court appointed Cesar de Mesa Tioseco as administrator of the intestate estate of Ricardo de Mesa Abad. Petitioners executed an extrajudicial settlement of the estate of their late mother Lucila de Mesa in their favor.
On 07 July 1972, private respondents Honoria Empaynado, Cecilia Abad Empaynado, and Marian Abad Empaynado filed a motion to set aside proceedings. In their motion, they alleged that Honoria Empaynado had been the common-law wife of Ricardo Abad for twenty-seven (27) years before his death, or from 1943 to 1971, and that during this period, their union had produced two (2) children, Cecilia Abad Empaynado and Marian Abad Empaynado. They also disclosed the existence of Rosemarie Abad, a child allegedly fathered by Ricardo Abad with another woman, Dolores Saracho. As the law awards the entire estate to the surviving children to the exclusion of collateral relatives, they charged petitioners with eliberately concealing the existence of said children in order to deprive the latter of their rights to the estate of Ricardo Abad.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the three (3) children were entitled to inherit
RULING:
Yes. Evidence presented by private respondents overwhelmingly proved that they are the acknowledged natural children of Ricardo Abad. They were able to prove that he stated in his individual income tax returns as his legitimate dependent children, Cecilia, Marian and Rosemarie Abad. He insured his daughters on a 20 year endowment plan. He opened a trust fund account for his daughters.
Finding that private respondents are the illegitimate children of Ricardo Abad, petitioners should have been precluded from inheriting the estate of their brother on the basis of the following Civil Code provisions:
Art. 988. In the absence of legitimate descendants or ascendants, the
illegitimate children shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased.
Art. 1003. If there are no illegitimate children, or a surviving spouse, the
collateral relatives shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased in
accordance with the following articles
Petitioners contested the filiation of the children by submitting that the husband of Honoria Empaynado, Jose Libunao, was still alive when Cecilia and Marian Abad were born. It was undisputed that prior to her relationship with Ricardo Abad, Honoria Empaynado was married to Jose Libunao. But while private respondents claim that Jose Libunao died in 1943, petitioners claim that the latter died sometime in 1971.
The evidence presented by petitioners to prove that Jose Libunao died in 1971 was inconclusive. The evidence presented was an enrolment form wherein there was failure to indicate that Jose was “deceased”. Such proof did not necessarily prove that said parent was still living during the time the form was being accomplished. The records of Loyola Memorial Park also showed that a certain Jose Bautista Libunao was indeed buried there in 1971. Such person was different from the husband whose full name was Jose Santos Libunao.
