Case Digest (G.R. No. 24367)
Facts:
Intestate Estate of the Deceased Juan Carballo, G.R. No. 24367, March 11, 1926, the Supreme Court En Banc, Ostrand, J., writing for the Court.This is an appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of Occidental Negros in the probate proceedings of the estate of Juan Carballo. The administratrix, Rosa Jalandoni (appellant), was represented at the hearing by counsel; one heir, Concepcion Carballo (appellee), likewise appeared by counsel. The trial court convened to determine the heirs and to settle the administratrix’s account.
Evidence established that Juan Carballo had married twice. From the first marriage he left two children, German and Concepcion Carballo. From the second marriage he had seven children, two of whom predeceased him; the surviving children of the second marriage were Cesar, Juan, Ernesto and Jose Carballo (one child, Maria Monserrat, later died without issue). Thus the court found six living heirs: German, Concepcion, Cesar, Juan, Ernesto and Jose.
The estate included the hacienda Buen Retiro, which Juan had purchased in 1884 — before his 1887 marriage to Rosa Jalandoni. Despite that, the property had been registered as conjugal property of Juan and Rosa, and afterward Rosa sold Buen Retiro to Lopez Vito for P30,000. Most of the purchase price had been paid to Rosa and expended by her; a balance remained unpaid and in Lopez Vito’s hands. Rosa (as administratrix) claimed that one-half of the price (P15,000) was her conjugal share and that P1,000 she said she used to buy shares in a sugar central was her separate property.
The trial court ruled that because the hacienda was originally owned by Juan before his marriage to Rosa, the administratrix must account for the whole sale price in administering the estate; purchasers in good faith could not be disturbed; Rosa could, however, claim credit for any sums she had properly expended for the benefit of the estate. The court also noted that the widow’s usufruct accrued at the husband’s death and therefore attached to proceeds of sale unless those proceeds were necessarily expended to pay estate debts and administration expenses, in which case the usufructuaria interest subsists as to any remaining portion; adjustment to be made under Articles 834 and 838 of the Civil Code. The Court of First Instance declared the six per...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May the Supreme Court review the trial court’s findings of fact in the absence of a motion for new trial under Section 497 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
- Was the administratrix required to account for the entire sale proceeds of Buen Retiro notwithstanding the property’s prior acquisition and its registration as conjugal property?
- Did the widow’s usufruct extend to the proceeds of sale and was she entitled to credit for sums ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)