Case Digest (G.R. No. 72706)
Facts:
In Constantino C. Acain v. Hon. Intermediate Appellate Court, petitioner Constantino C. Acain filed on May 29, 1984 in the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, Branch XIII, Special Proceedings No. 591-A-CEB, a petition to probate the will of the late Nemesio Acain dated February 17, 1960 and to secure letters testamentary in his favor. The will, written in Bisaya with an English translation, appointed Atty. Ignacio G. Villagonzalo as executor and disposed of the testator’s property by directing that his shares jointly acquired with his wife, Rosa Diongson (now respondent widow), be given to his brother Segundo Acain, and upon Segundo’s prior death, to his children—among them petitioner and his seven siblings. Because Segundo predeceased the testator, petitioner and his brothers and sisters claimed under the will. Oppositors Rosa Diongson Vda. de Acain (the widow) and Virginia A. Fernandez (the legally adopted daughter) moved to dismiss on grounds that petitioner lacked legal capacCase Digest (G.R. No. 72706)
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Constantino C. Acain (petitioner) filed on May 29, 1984 in RTC Cebu City, Branch XIII, Special Proceedings No. 591-A-CEB a petition to probate the will of his father, Nemesio Acain, and for issuance of letters testamentary.
- Oppositors in the probate proceedings were Rosa Diongson (widow) and Virginia A. Fernandez (legally adopted daughter of the decedent).
- Alleged Will and Testamentary Disposition
- The will dated February 17, 1960, written in Bisaya with an English translation, appointed Atty. Ignacio G. Villagonzalo as executor and contained provisions on burial, payment of debts, and disposition of the testator’s share.
- It provided that all shares earned jointly with testator’s wife be given to brother Segundo Acain, and if he predeceased the testator, to his children: Anita, Constantino, Concepcion, Quirina, Laura, Flores, Antonio, and Jose Acain.
- Proceedings in the Regional Trial Court
- Oppositors moved to dismiss on grounds that petitioner lacked legal capacity, was a universal heir only, and that the widow and adopted daughter had been preterited.
- The RTC denied the motion to dismiss on January 21, 1985, and likewise denied a motion for reconsideration on February 15, 1985.
- Intermediate Appellate Court and Supreme Court Petitions
- Private respondents filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition in the Supreme Court, which was raffled to the Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC).
- On August 30, 1985, the IAC granted the petition and ordered dismissal of Special Proceedings No. 591-A-CEB; its October 23, 1985 resolution denied respondents’ motion for reconsideration.
- Petitioner filed a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court on December 18, 1985; the Court gave due course on August 11, 1986.
Issues:
- Proper Remedy
- Whether certiorari and prohibition was the proper remedy instead of an appeal.
- Substantive Issues
- Whether the probate court’s authority is limited to extrinsic validity or may pass on intrinsic validity of the will.
- Whether the will preterited compulsory heirs in the direct line (adopted daughter) and thus annulled the institution of heirs under Article 854 of the Civil Code.
- Whether petitioner, as instituted heir and universal heir only, had legal capacity/standing to file the petition for probate.
- Whether Article 854 of the Civil Code is unconstitutional as a bill of attainder.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)