A.C. No. 12079 - Manalang vs. Buendia

Vicente and Anita Ang, a married couple, died in 1964 and 1979 respectively, and were buried at the Chinese Cemetery in Manila according to Anita's wish.
The Chinese Cemetery is owned and operated by the Philippine Chinese Charitable Association, Inc.
Corazon Ang Sy and Belen Ang Casimiro, their children, wanted in 2005 to exhume, cremate, and transfer their parents' remains to Santuario de San Antonio in Makati City due to distance, age, presence of informal settlers at the cemetery, and incidents of theft and vandalism.
The scheduled exhumation on October 12, 2005, was prevented by the cemetery association because of objections from other family members: Caesar Ang, Jr., Ernesto Ang, and Raymond Ang.
Caesar, Jr. and Ernesto are Vicente’s son and grandson outside his marriage to Anita; Raymond is a grandson of Vicente and Anita.
These objectors claimed their consent was necessary as male descendants under Chinese custom and Anita’s wish for burial in the Chinese Cemetery.

Corazon and Belen filed a Petition for Writ of Mandatory Injunction with Damages in 2008 to compel transfer of their parents’ remains, citing Article 308 of the New Civil Code concerning consent over exhumation.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Pasig City, denied the Petition, stating Article 307 (funeral in accordance with deceased’s wish) applied rather than Article 308.
The RTC emphasized that Vicente and Anita’s burial wishes should be respected as expressed, referencing Valino v. Adriano on presumption in ambiguity, which was not present here.
The RTC also dismissed respondents' counterclaims and imposed costs on petitioners.

Corazon and Belen appealed; the Court of Appeals (CA) partially granted the appeal, set aside the RTC decision, and ordered the Philippine Chinese Charitable Association to proceed with exhumation and transfer of remains to Makati.
The claim for damages was dismissed for lack of merit.
Motions for reconsideration by both parties were denied by the CA.

Caesar, Jr. and Ernesto died during the lower court proceedings.
Raymond Ang (petitioner), who contested the CA decision, argued against exhumation citing Anita’s clear burial wish and Chinese customs requiring male descendants’ consent.
He claimed proprietary rights over the burial lots and maintenance payments.
He also raised laches (delay) and procedural non-compliance with cemetery requirements.
Corazon and Belen opposed, emphasizing Articles 305 and 308 of the Civil Code, the inapplicability of Article 307 for burial site, rejection of Chinese customs that discriminate against women, and absence of estoppel by laches.

Raymond filed a Petition for Review before the Supreme Court.
Before filing a Reply, Raymond died (July 31, 2020).
His counsel notified the court, submitted names and addresses of heirs, who declined to substitute Raymond as petitioner.
Respondents moved for dismissal of the appeal due to petitioner’s death, asserting the action was extinguished since it involved personal obligation, not property rights.
The Court of Appeals decision and resolution were maintained and affirmed upon motion granted.

Whether the petitioners had the right to exhume, cremate, and transfer the remains of Vicente and Anita Ang despite the expressed burial wishes of the deceased and the objections of other descendants.

The applicability and proper interpretation of Articles 307, 308, and 305 of the New Civil Code regarding burial wishes, exhumation, and the rights of descendants.

Whether Chinese customs requiring male descendants' consent hold legal weight in this case.

The effect of the death of the petitioner (Raymond Ang) on the appeal and whether his heirs must substitute him to continue the case.