Case Digest (G.R. No. L-14851)
Facts:
In Intestate Estate of the Deceased Marcelo de Borja, G.R. No. L-14851, August 31, 1961, the Supreme Court En Banc, Bengzon, C.J., writing for the Court, resolved an appeal by a third‑party claimant‑oppositor. In an earlier proceeding (G.R. No. L-6622, decided July 1957) the Supreme Court had affirmed a Rizal Court of First Instance judgment ordering Crisanto de Borja to pay several putative heirs (Juan, Marcela, Saturnina, Eufracia, Jacoba and Olimpia Borja) and reduced the award to P46,210.78 plus legal interest; that decision became final and executory.
Pursuant to execution, the clerk of court issued a writ and, in April 1958, the sheriff levied on the rights and interests of Crisanto de Borja as a prospective heir of the deceased spouses Josefa Tangco and Francisco de Borja in certain real property in Rizal. Jose de Borja, as administrator of the estate of Josefa Tangco, presented a third‑party claim to the sheriff asserting that the levied properties belonged to the decedent’s estate then in liquidation in Special Proceedings No. 7866 and were therefore in custodia legis.
Acting on that opposition, the sheriff required the judgment‑creditors to post a bond of P2,500,000.00. The judgment‑creditors sought relief from the court, contending the bond was unnecessary; the administrator maintained the levy was improper. After hearing, the trial court (the Court) held that the levy itself was proper but that the sheriff had exceeded his powers in demanding a bond because ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is the interest of an heir (or prospective heir) in property belonging to a decedent’s estate subject to attachment and levy for execution while the estate is under judicial administration?
- Was the sheriff authorized to demand that the judgment‑creditors post a bond when the administrator filed a third‑party claim asserting custodia legis but the oppositors did not submit a ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)