Case Digest (G.R. No. 4918)
Facts:
- The case involves a claim allowed by a commission against the estate of deceased Don Francisco de P. de la Rosa.
- The case was filed by Feliciana Dariano, administratrix de bonis non of the property of the deceased, and Eugenio Fernandez, tutor of the minor heirs of the deceased, against Jose Fernandez Fidalgo.
- The claim allowed by the commission amounted to P17,234.27.
- The plaintiffs argued that the commission had no authority to consider the claim and that fraud was involved in its allowance.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The claim allowed by the commission is null and void.
- The commission had no jurisdiction to consider the claim....(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The Supreme Court held that the claim was against the partnership and not against De la Rosa's private estate until the liquidation of the partnership business.
- The claim originated before the death of De la Rosa, but it should have been settled after the liquidation of the partnership.
- The commission had no jurisdiction to consider the claim as it was not within their authority to decide claims against the partnership.
- The lower court's ...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 4918)
Facts:
The case of Dariano v. Fidalgo involves a claim against the estate of the deceased Don Francisco de P. de la Rosa. The plaintiffs, Feliciana Dariano and Eugenio Fernandez, sought to have a certain account allowed by the commission declared null and void. The claim allowed by the commission amounted to P17,234.27. The defendant, Jose Fernandez Fidalgo, based his claim on two grounds: lack of authority and jurisdiction of the commission to consider the claim, and fraud in the allowance of the claim.
The facts of the case reveal that De la Rosa and Fidalgo entered into an agreement to purchase and operate two cascoes in early 1900. A dispute arose regarding Fidalgo's right to participate in the profits from the management of the cascoes, which was eventually decided by the Supreme Court in favor of Fidalgo. After the Supreme Court decision, De la Rosa died and Carmelino Punsalan was appointed as the administrator of his estate. A committee was appointed to hear and allow claims against De la Rosa's estate. Fidalgo, without waiting for a settlement of the partnership account, presented his claim to the committee, which was allowed. Later, Dariano and Fernandez were appointed as the new administrators of the estate and filed the present action to declare the claim null and void due to fraud.
Issue:
The main issues raised in the case are:
- Whether the claim presented by Fidalgo should be declared null and void due to lack of authority and jurisdiction of the commission to consider the claim.
- Whether fraud was committed in the allowance of Fidalgo's claim.
Ruling:
The Sup...