Case Digest (G.R. No. 27120)
Facts:
In the case of Juana Agapito vs. Candido Molo, the plaintiff-appellee, Juana Agapito, filed a case against the defendant-appellant, Candido Molo, in the Court of First Instance of Manila. The case was decided on September 28, 1927. The dispute arose over the management and income derived from Agapito's paraphernal property. The trial court issued a preliminary injunction that allowed Agapito to retain the rents produced by her property after deducting the necessary administration expenses. This injunction also granted her exclusive authority to manage her property without any intervention from Molo. Molo appealed the decision, claiming that the trial court made three errors: (1) issuing the preliminary injunction, (2) dismissing his cross-complaint, and (3) denying his motion for a new trial. The trial court's ruling was based on the understanding that the property in question was Agapito's paraphernal property, and according to Article 1384 of the Civil Code...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 27120)
Facts:
Parties Involved:
- Plaintiff and Appellee: Juana Agapito
- Defendant and Appellant: Candido Molo
Nature of the Case:
- Juana Agapito filed a case against Candido Molo, her husband, seeking to retain the net income from her paraphernal property after deducting administration expenses, in lieu of maintenance (alimony) she is entitled to receive from him.
Property in Question:
- The property is the paraphernal property of Juana Agapito, meaning it is her exclusive property under the Civil Code.
Legal Context:
- Under Article 1384 of the Civil Code, Juana Agapito is entitled to administer her paraphernal property since she did not deliver it to her husband for management.
- Article 1401 of the Civil Code states that the fruits, income, or interest from paraphernal property during marriage belong to the conjugal partnership.
- Article 1412 of the Civil Code designates the husband as the administrator of conjugal property.
Trial Court Decision:
- The Court of First Instance of Manila issued a preliminary injunction, allowing Juana Agapito to retain the net income from her paraphernal property after deducting administration expenses, in lieu of maintenance.
- The court also granted Juana exclusive authority to administer her property without her husband’s intervention.
Appeal:
- Candido Molo appealed the decision, assigning three errors:
(1) The trial court erred in issuing the preliminary injunction.
(2) The trial court erred in dismissing his cross-complaint.
(3) The trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial.
- Candido Molo appealed the decision, assigning three errors:
Issue:
- Whether the trial court erred in issuing the preliminary injunction allowing Juana Agapito to retain the net income from her paraphernal property.
- Whether the trial court erred in dismissing Candido Molo’s cross-complaint.
- Whether the trial court erred in denying Candido Molo’s motion for a new trial.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)