Case Digest (G.R. No. 209651)
Facts:
Marcelo Investment and Management Corporation, and the Heirs of Edward T. Marcelo, Namely, Katherine J. Marcelo, Anna Melinda J. Marcelo Revilla, and John Steven J. Marcelo, Petitioners, vs. Jose T. Marcelo, Jr., Respondent, G.R. No. 209651, November 26, 2014, First Division, Perez, J., writing for the Court.The dispute arises from the intestate estate of Jose T. Marcelo, Sr., who died on August 24, 1987, survived by four compulsory heirs: Edward, George, Helen, and Jose T. Marcelo, Jr. Early proceedings began when Marcelo Investment and Management Corporation (MIMCO) filed for issuance of letters of administration before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 76, Quezon City (S.P. Proc. No. Q-88-1448). Initially, Helen and Jose, Jr. opposed MIMCO’s petition and sought appointment themselves; Edward opposed them and sought appointment as regular administrator. Pending final appointment, the RTC appointed Helen and Jose, Jr. as special administrators on September 21, 1989.
On December 13, 1991, the RTC appointed Edward T. Marcelo as regular administrator upon posting of bond. Jose, Jr. filed motions for reconsideration and an omnibus motion alleging irregularity; the RTC denied these motions on March 12, 1992, and on further motion reaffirmed its earlier orders. Jose, Jr. appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No. 43674; the CA affirmed the RTC’s orders. The issue reached the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 123883 (Jose Marcelo, Jr. v. Court of Appeals and Edward Marcelo), and by Minute Resolution dated May 22, 1996 the Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts’ rulings, effectively upholding Edward’s appointment.
As regular administrator Edward proceeded with inventory, liquidation and a proposed partition. The RTC, on February 16, 2001, approved a liquidation/project of partition that bore the conformity of all four compulsory heirs but deferred distribution pending proof of payment of estate taxes; the intestate proceedings were later archived on September 14, 2001 awaiting payment of estate taxes. Edward died on July 3, 2009.
Following Edward’s death, Jose, Jr. moved to revive the archived proceedings and sought appointment as the new regular administrator. Petitioners (MIMCO and Edward’s heirs), joined by George, opposed and nominated Atty. Henry Reyes. On January 6, 2010 the RTC appointed Jose, Jr. as regular administrator, required to post bond and update the inventory and render account. Petitioners’ omnibus motion for reconsideration was denied on March 23, 2010.
The Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 95219 affirmed the RTC’s January 6 and March 23, 2010 orders, reasoning that (a) the earlier 1991 RTC order appointing Edward did not equate to a categorical finding tha...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is the appointment of a regular administrator still necessary to complete the settlement of Jose P. Marcelo, Sr.’s estate at the liquidation, partition and distribution stage?
- Does the prior adjudication — the RTC’s December 13, 1991 order (affirmed by higher courts) favoring Edward over Jose, Jr. — bar the appointment of Jose, Jr. as regular administrator now that Edward is deceased?
- If Jose, Jr. cannot be appointed, who should be appointed administrator and what r...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)