Case Digest (G.R. No. L-8806) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
The case at hand involves a petition for habeas corpus filed by Maria N. Banzon (petitioner) against respondents Pedro Alviar, Teresa Alviar, and Ruby Alviar. The petition was dated May 25, 1955, and arose from the situation involving Maria's son, Angelo N. Banzon, who at the time was a minor aged nine years. The core of the dispute centers on the custody of Angelo, who was allegedly being unlawfully detained by the respondents. Respondents admitted to having custody of the child but asserted that he was entrusted to them by his father, Colonel Jose Banzon, who was serving as the Philippine Military Attaché in Saigon. They claimed to provide quality care for the child, sending him to school with the support of his father.Testimonies during the trial revealed that Angelo had been sent to Saigon for a vacation in June 1954 and returned to the Philippines under Ruby Alviar's care in September 1954. Since his return, Maria made repeated attempts to regain custody of her so
... Case Digest (G.R. No. L-8806) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties Involved:
- Petitioner: Maria N. Banzon, the mother of the minor Angelo N. Banzon.
- Respondents: Pedro Alviar, Teresa Alviar, and Ruby Alviar, who had custody of the child.
- Background of the Case:
- Angelo N. Banzon, a 9-year-old boy, is the legitimate son of Maria N. Banzon and Colonel Jose Banzon of the Philippine Army.
- In June 1954, Maria sent Angelo to his father in Saigon for a vacation.
- Angelo returned to the Philippines in September 1954 with Ruby Alviar and has since been in the custody of the Alviars.
- Petitioner’s Claims:
- Maria repeatedly attempted to regain custody of Angelo but was refused by the Alviars, who insisted on needing a court order to release him.
- Maria filed a petition for habeas corpus to recover custody of her son.
- Respondents’ Defense:
- The Alviars admitted to having custody of Angelo but claimed he was entrusted to them by his father, Colonel Jose Banzon.
- They argued that Angelo was being cared for and educated appropriately.
- During the proceedings, they claimed Angelo was no longer in their custody as he had allegedly been taken back to Saigon by his father.
- Subsequent Developments:
- Maria moved to hold the respondents in contempt for allegedly transferring custody of Angelo without court approval.
- The respondents later filed a manifestation stating that Angelo had returned to Manila on April 11, 1955, and was now in the custody of his aunt, Atty. Soledad Banzon, in Baliwag, Bulacan.
- The respondents disclaimed any further interest in Angelo’s custody and expressed willingness to surrender him to whoever the court deemed legally entitled.
Issues:
The sole issue to be resolved is: Who is entitled to the care and custody of the minor Angelo N. Banzon?Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)