Title
De Bacayo vs. De Borromeo
Case
G.R. No. L-19382
Decision Date
Aug 31, 1965
Melodia Ferraris, presumed dead, left an estate with no direct heirs. Her nieces/nephew and aunt claimed inheritance. Court ruled nieces/nephew exclude aunt, prioritizing closer familial ties under succession laws.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-19382)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of the Case
    • Melodia Ferraris was a resident of Cebu City until 1937 and then transferred to Intramuros, Manila, where she lived continuously until 1944.
    • After 1944 and until the filing of the petition on December 22, 1960, she has not been heard from and her whereabouts remain unknown.
    • More than ten years having passed since she was last known to be alive, Melodia Ferraris was declared presumptively dead for the purpose of opening her succession and distributing her estate.
  • Properties and Heirs
    • Melodia Ferraris left properties in Cebu City, notably a one-third share in the estate of her aunt Rosa Ferraris, valued at approximately P6,000, which was adjudicated to her in a prior special proceeding.
    • The decedent left no surviving direct descendants, ascendants, or spouse.
    • The surviving collateral relatives were:
      • Filomena Abellana de Bacayo – an aunt of Melodia and half-sister of Melodia’s father, Anacleto Ferraris; and
      • Gaudencia, Catalina, Conchita, and Juanito Ferraris – nieces and nephew, children of Arturo Ferraris, Melodia’s only brother, who predeceased her.
    • Both groups claim to be the nearest intestate heirs and seek to participate in the inheritance.
    • The parties’ degree of relationship was diagrammed in court but not detailed in the opinion.
  • Trial Court Proceedings and Resolution
    • The trial court excluded petitioner-appellant Filomena Abellana de Bacayo as heir in the summary settlement of the estate.
    • The trial court ruled that the nieces and nephew of the decedent, as children of the predeceased brother, were nearer heirs (second degree) than the aunt (third degree).
    • The trial court relied on the rule that brothers or sisters or their children exclude other collateral relatives according to Article 1009 of the Civil Code.
    • Petitioner-appellant moved for reconsideration which was denied.
    • This appeal followed, raising points of law directly before the Supreme Court by a pauper’s appeal.

Issues:

  • Who should inherit the intestate estate of a deceased person when only collateral relatives survive, specifically between:
    • An aunt (petitioner-appellant), and
    • The children of the decedent’s predeceased brother (nieces and nephew – oppositors-appellees)?
  • Do the nieces and nephew inherit by right of representation excluding the aunt, or do they inherit in their own right alongside the aunt?
  • Whether the aunt, being a collateral relative of equal degree, should be excluded from inheritance under the law.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.