Case Digest (G.R. No. 8235)
Facts:
Isidoro Santos v. Leandra Manarang, G.R. No. 8235. March 19, 1914, the Supreme Court, Trent, J., writing for the Court.Don Lucas de Ocampo died on November 18, 1906, leaving a will dated July 26, 1906, that bequeathed his residue to his three children and contained a fourth clause declaring that certain debts listed in the will were contracted by him and “it is my desire that they be religiously paid by my wife and executors.” Among the items listed were two claims in favor of Isidoro Santos (the appellant) — one P5,000 due April 14, 1907, and other items amounting to P2,454 (totaling P7,454). The will was probated and a committee to hear claims was appointed.
The committee filed its report (the majority notes June 27, 1908). The record shows orders appointing committees and changes in executor and committee members (including an order of January 8, 1908, directing new notice to creditors). Santos did not present his claims to the committee within the period prescribed by the probate notices and later sought to have the committee reconvened to consider them; the probate court denied his petition. On November 21, 1910, Santos then instituted proceedings against Leandra Manarang, the administratrix (the appellee), seeking to recover the sums as debts recognized in the will; the lower court dismissed his petition. The orders denying reconvening of the committee and denying relief against the administratrix were appealed to the Supreme Court.
The lower tribunal’s rulings were that (1) the record affirmatively showed the committee had given the notices required by law and the time for presenting claims (and extensions) had lapsed, so the committee need not be reconvened; and (2) the petition to compel the administratrix to pay sums named in the wil...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in refusing to reconvene the committee to consider appellant’s belated claims against the estate?
- Did the trial court err in dismissing appellant’s petition to compel the administratrix to pay debts listed in the will — i.e., may a creditor enforce as a debt (or legacy) amounts expressly recognized in a testator’s will without complying with t...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)