G.R. No. 136467 - Armas vs. Calisterio

Teodorico Calisterio died intestate on 24 April 1992, leaving several parcels of land valued at approximately P604,750.00.
He was survived by his wife, Marietta Calisterio (respondent), and a sister, Antonia Armas y Calisterio (petitioner).

Marietta was previously married to James William Bounds on 13 January 1946 in Caloocan City.
James Bounds disappeared on 11 February 1947, without trace.
Despite the absence of a judicial declaration of presumptive death for James, Marietta contracted a second marriage with Teodorico on 08 May 1958.

Petition for intestate estate administration and challenge of marriage validity

On 09 October 1992, petitioner Antonia Armas filed a petition before the RTC of Quezon City to be declared the sole heir of Teodorico, alleging that Marietta’s second marriage was bigamous and therefore void.
Petitioner prayed for the appointment of her son as sole administrator of Teodorico’s estate and that the inheritance be adjudicated to her after settling obligations.
Respondent Marietta opposed, claiming her first marriage to James was effectively dissolved due to his long absence, thus entitling her to administration and inheritance rights as surviving spouse.

RTC appointed both Marietta and petitioner’s son as joint administrators of the estate.
On 17 January 1996, the RTC ruled in favor of petitioner, declaring her as the sole heir and finding the second marriage between Marietta and Teodorico void on grounds of bigamy.
Marietta appealed, asserting:

The Family Code did not apply as the marriage was under the New Civil Code regime.
The marriage was not bigamous despite lack of judicial declaration of death.
The property at No. 32 Batangas Street was conjugal property belonging to her and Teodorico.
She was a legal heir of Teodorico.
Letters of administration should be granted to her solely.

The marriage of Marietta and Teodorico remained valid.
The Batangas Street property was conjugal partnership property, with the obligation to pay its value to the estate.
Marietta, as compulsory heir, was entitled to one-half of Teodorico’s estate; petitioner and her children, the other half.
The trial court was ordered to determine Marietta’s competence to administer the estate.

Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied on 23 November 1998, prompting this appeal.

Whether the second marriage between Marietta and Teodorico, solemnized in 1958 during the New Civil Code regime, is valid despite the absence of a judicial declaration of presumptive death of Marietta’s first spouse, James Bounds.

Whether Marietta is entitled to inherit as the surviving spouse of Teodorico and whether their properties should be considered conjugal partnership property.

Whether petitioner’s children have the right to inherit from Teodorico’s estate jointly with her.