G.R. No. 43701 - Jones vs. Hortiguela

Marciana Escano died intestate, leaving behind an estate subject to legal proceedings.
Felix Hortiguela, her widower from her second marriage, was appointed judicial administrator of the entire estate.
An order dated May 9, 1932, declared the heirs of Marciana Escano to be her daughter (by her first marriage), Angelita Jones, and her widower, Felix Hortiguela.

The Court of First Instance of Cebu issued several orders during the administration:

The order of May 9, 1932, which declared the heirs.
The January 10, 1933, order granting the administrator fees amounting to P10,000 as compensation for his services.
The June 26, 1933, order approving the final account and the project of partition.

The project of partition presented by the administrator allocated a share of the conjugate properties and usufructuary rights to Hortiguela and designated the balance to Angelita Jones.
Despite imperfections in the record-keeping, particularly the failure to record the marriage with the local civil registry, the orders continued to provide for the distribution of the estate.

On May 3, 1934, Angelita Jones, by then married to Ernesto Lardizabal, filed a motion challenging aspects of the prior proceedings.
Her challenges included:

Contending that she was the sole heir of Marciana Escano.
Asserting that there was either no valid marriage between Marciana Escano and Felix Hortiguela or, if there was, that it rendered Hortiguela ineligible for a usufruct share.
Alleging that, as a minor, she was improperly represented by the same attorney used by Hortiguela, compromising her rights.
Arguing that there were significant errors and inaccuracies in the administrator’s final account and partition project, particularly regarding administrative fees and the delineation between paraphernal and conjugal properties.

The central issue revolved around the validity of the marriage between Felix Hortiguela and Marciana Escano.
Key facts concerning the marriage included:

Marciana Escano’s prior marriage to Arthur W. Jones in December 1914 in a Catholic church in San Nicolas, Cebu.
Arthur W. Jones’s disappearance after securing a passport in January 1918 and subsequent judicial declaration of his absence in proceedings initiated in October 1919 with effects manifesting after April 23, 1921.
The subsequent marriage between Felix Hortiguela and Marciana Escano on May 6, 1927, which was scrutinized under General Orders No. 68 requiring a seven-year period of absence of the previous spouse.

Evidence showed that despite disputes regarding the effective date of declared absence, the period from January 10, 1918, to May 6, 1927, exceeded the required seven consecutive years, thereby supporting the validity of the marriage.

Denied the motion to appoint a new administrator.
Set aside the January 10, 1933, order on administrator fees.
Set aside the June 26, 1933, order approving the partition and final account, ordering a new project to be submitted.
Reserved the discussion regarding which properties were deemed paraphernal or conjugal.

Both parties (Angelita Jones and Felix Hortiguela) subsequently appealed these provisions.

Whether the marriage between Felix Hortiguela and Marciana Escano was valid in light of:

The prior marriage of Marciana Escano to Arthur W. Jones.
The procedural declaration of absence and the requirements prescribed by General Orders No. 68.

Whether the orders setting aside the administrator’s fees (January 10, 1933) and the partition/final account (June 26, 1933) should stand as rendered.
Whether the motion to appoint a new administrator (Angelita Jones’ husband) was properly granted or denied.

Whether the allocation of P10,000 for the administrator’s fees, including the distribution of P8,000 for attorney services and P2,000 for his own fee, was just and reasonable.

Whether the court retained jurisdiction to set aside the previous orders and require a new partition final account, especially given that some orders had become final due to lack of appeal.
How the failure to record the marriage affected the administrative proceedings and legal validity of the marriage itself.