Case Digest (G.R. No. 125485)
Facts:
This is Restituta Leonardo, assisted by Jose T. Ramos, v. Court of Appeals, and Teodoro Sebastian, Vicente Sebastian, Corazon Sebastian, et al., G.R. No. 125485, September 13, 2004, Supreme Court Third Division, Corona, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Restituta Leonardo is the only legitimate child of the late spouses Tomasina Paul and Balbino Leonardo. The private respondents — the numerous Sebastians — are the illegitimate children of Tomasina Paul by her subsequent partner, Jose Sebastian. Petitioner alleged that on June 24, 1988 private respondent Corazon Sebastian, her niece Julieta and another companion came to petitioner’s house and presented an extrajudicial partition written in English; petitioner, who only finished Grade 3 and could not understand English, asked that her husband translate the document but was assured by Corazon that her legitimate share was provided for and was induced to sign without having the text explained in a language she understood.
Petitioner later obtained a copy and learned that the partition allotted her only 7,671.75 sq.m., whereas as a legitimate child she should have received one-half (19,282.5 sq.m.) of Tomasina Paul’s estate. Petitioner filed a complaint before Branch 57, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Carlos City seeking declaration of nullity of the extrajudicial settlement of estate on grounds of vitiated consent (mistake/fraud). Private respondents answered, raising lack of cause of action, and asserted that all parties, including petitioner, appeared before MTC Judge Juan Austria on July 27, 1988 to acknowledge and have the document explained and that petitioner’s signing estopped her from challenging the instrument.
Petitioner filed an amended complaint on July 27, 1989 to join additional parties. At pre-trial on August 23, 1990 the parties agreed that the sole issue was whether petitioner’s consent to the extrajudicial partition was voluntarily given. On February 22, 1993 the RTC dismissed the complaint and the counterclaim, ruling that fraud or duress was not established and suggesting reformation, but in obiter noted petitioner’s legitime share. The Court of Appeals (Tenth Division; decision penned by Atty. Justice Alfredo L. Benipayo) affirmed the ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was petitioner’s consent to the extrajudicial settlement of estate given voluntarily? ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)