Case Digest (G.R. No. L-10000)
Facts:
Sison v. Suntay, G.R. No. L-10000, December 28, 1957, the Supreme Court, Bengzon, J., writing for the Court.
Appellant Teofilo Sison (claimant) sued for allowance and payment of attorney’s fees against respondent Federico C. Suntay, administrator of the intestate estate of Jose B. Suntay (respondent‑administrator and appellee).
Jose B. Suntay died on May 14, 1934, in Amoy, China, leaving properties in the Philippines and China and ten children (nine by a first marriage, one by a second). Letters of administration were first issued to Apolonio Suntay and, after his death, to Federico C. Suntay. Various petitions for probate of wills were filed through the years: an initial 1934 petition by the surviving widow (denied, remanded to the trial court, later dismissed for lack of testimony), and, after World War II, an alternative petition by Silvino Suntay (June 18, 1947) alleging wills executed in 1929 (Philippines) or 1931 (Amoy). The motion for probate was litigated before the Bulacan Court of First Instance (Judge Pecson) from October 13, 1947 to March 9, 1948.
During the postwar litigation the administrator was represented initially by Attys. Roxas, Picazo and Mejia. While a motion for reconsideration of the trial court’s April 19, 1948 order admitting the will was pending, Atty. Teofilo Sison was engaged in substitution for the administrator’s prior counsel (without an express contract fixing fees, the agreement being for reasonable compensation). Sison filed pleadings, argued the motion for reconsideration and later handled the appeal to the Supreme Court; he also represented the administrator in related motions (removal of the administrator, approval of accounts, motion to fix administrator’s fees, and motion to mortgage estate property). For his services he had received payments totaling P67,000 from the administrator.
Judge Pecson on September 29, 1948 granted the administrator’s motion for reconsideration and denied Silvino’s alternative petition; that order was appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s September 29, 1948 order by final judgment dated July 31, 1954. After finality, Sison demanded P400,000 for his services; the administrator refused, contending the P67,000 already paid sufficed. Sison filed, on December 29, 1954, a petition in the Bulacan case seeking annotation of a charging lien and allowance and payment of P400...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Were the professional services rendered by Atty. Teofilo Sison chargeable to the intestate estate of Jose B. Suntay so as to permit annotation of a charging lien and allowance of attorney’s fees against the estate?
- If chargeable, was Atty. Sison entitled to the claimed P400,000, and if not, what reasonable amount of addit...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)