G.R. No. 93711 - Marohombsar vs. Alonto, Jr.

The resolution consolidates two cases involving Rosario M. Ponce Enrile as the appellant/petitioner:

Case L‑26502 – an action for support filed in Quezon City in 1964.
Case L‑28160 – an intestacy proceeding concerning the estate of the late Alfonso Ponce Enrile.

Both cases are intertwined due to issues arising from the nature of the marital relationship and the subsequent estate proceedings following the decedent’s death.

Rosario M. Ponce Enrile filed an action for support on June 26, 1964, alleging a marriage with Alfonso Ponce Enrile that began on March 2, 1911.
She claimed that the parties lived as husband and wife until 1925, when the defendant abandoned the conjugal dwelling without justifiable cause.
In the defendant’s answer filed on July 28, 1964, one special defense raised was that the marriage had been lawfully dissolved by a second and valid decree of divorce issued by the Court of First Instance of Manila on March 28, 1944.
A preliminary hearing was conducted regarding the affirmative defense of divorce, leading to a partial decision on April 28, 1966, affirming that a valid decree of divorce had indeed been rendered.

The intestacy proceeding was initiated on the principal allegation that Alfonso Ponce Enrile died on July 3, 1967, without leaving a will.
Rosario Martinez vda. de Ponce Enrile, as petitioner, also sought letters of administration and to be named special administratrix, listing the children and grandchildren of the deceased as heirs.
A motion to dismiss was filed by Attorney Leonardo Siguion Reyna, who contended that the decedent’s alleged last will and testament had been delivered to the Rizal Court of First Instance on July 20, 1967, and that the movant had subsequently petitioned for its probate.
An appealed order issued on September 4, 1967, dismissed the intestacy case, providing that the intestate proceedings would only proceed if and when the purported will was declared null and void by the court.

On April 28, 1975, in case L‑26502, Rosario Martinez vda. de Ponce Enrile filed a motion to dismiss her appeal, stating that an amicable settlement had been reached regarding the estate of the decedent.

The motion requested dismissal of the appeal without pronouncements as to costs.

Similarly, on May 15, 1975, in case L‑28160, she filed a motion to dismiss her appeal on the same grounds of an amicable settlement.
The consolidated resolution granted the motions to dismiss in both proceedings, thereby ending further litigation on these appeals.

Whether the decree of divorce issued on March 28, 1944, in Manila was valid and had the legal effect of dissolving the marriage of the parties.
How the acknowledgment of the divorce impacted the action for support in case L‑26502.

Whether Alfonso Ponce Enrile’s estate should be administered as an intestacy due to the absence of a valid will, or if the alleged last will presented in the proceedings had any legal validity.
The impact of the dismissal order in the intestacy case, pending the declaration of the alleged will as null and void.

Whether the amicable settlement among all heirs justified the dismissal of the pending appeals in both cases.
The appropriateness of dismissing the appeals without pronouncement as to costs when the parties indicated no desire to pursue further litigation.