Case Digest (G.R. No. 6871)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 6871)
Facts:
Jose McMicking, Administrator of the Estate of Margarita Jose v. Benito Sy Conbieng, Administrator of the Estate of Pio de la Guardia Barretto (sy Piooco), G.R. No. 6871, January 15, 1912, the Supreme Court, Moreland, J., writing for the Court.On February 5, 1902, Margarita Jose died in Amoy (China), leaving personal property partly in Hongkong and partly in the Philippine Islands. On April 16, 1902 the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila appointed Engracio Palanca administrator with the will annexed of her estate; his sureties were Mariano Ocampo Lao Sempco and Dy Cunyao, and Palanca thereafter took possession of the estate (about $58,820.29 Hongkong currency).
Mariano Ocampo died on April 22, 1904, testate. On May 11, 1904 Doroteo Velasco was appointed administrator with the will annexed of Mariano’s estate; Velasco’s sureties (qualified July 7, 1904) included Pio de la Guardia Barretto. Velasco filed a complete inventory and, by agreement among all interested persons executed under Sections 596 and 597 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the heirs partitioned Mariano’s estate without formal in-court proceedings. The Court of First Instance approved that partition on July 28, 1904, and Velasco delivered the estate to the devisees and legatees; thereafter the administrator had no assets or participation in the estate’s management. At the time there was no appointment of a committee to hear claims against Mariano’s estate and no publication of notice to creditors.
Palanca later absconded and was removed as administrator of Margarita’s estate (March 30, 1908); Jose McMicking was appointed his successor and alleged a deficit of P41,960.15 from Palanca’s administration. On June 30, 1909 McMicking procured the appointment of commissioners to hear claims against Mariano’s estate; the commission allowed McMicking’s claim arising from Palanca’s default and the Court directed Velasco to pay if he had funds, but no payment was made.
Pio de la Guardia Barretto died November 3, 1905; his will was probated February 3, 1906 and letters issued to Benito Sy Conbieng. A committee appointed June 4, 1909 to settle Pio’s estate disallowed McMicking’s claim of P30,000 (premised on the allowance against Mariano’s estate and the supposed obligation of Pio as surety). McMicking appealed the committee’s disallowance to the Court of First Instance. After hearing, the court rendered judgment for defendant Conbieng, dismissing the complaint on the merits. McMicking appealed that judgment to the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Was the appointment of commissioners to hear and allow McMicking’s claim against the estate of Mariano Ocampo valid and within the court’s jurisdiction?
- Did the partition of Mariano’s estate under Sections 596 and 597, Code of Civil Procedure extinguish the estate as to the then-administrator and discharge the administrator and his sureties (thereby relieving Pio de la Guardia Barretto’s estate of liability)?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)