Case Digest (G.R. No. 93867)
Facts:
In Alan Joseph A. Sheker v. Estate of Alice O. Sheker, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iligan City, Branch 6, admitted to probate the holographic will of Alice O. Sheker and required all creditors to submit their claims. On October 7, 2002, petitioner Sheker filed a contingent money claim against the estate for an agent’s commission of ₱206,250.00 and reimbursement of ₱275,000.00 for expenses incurred in negotiating the sale of estate lands. The administratrix, Victoria S. Medina, moved to dismiss the claim on three grounds: (1) non-payment of the requisite docket fee under Section 7(a), Rule 141 of the Rules of Court; (2) absence of a certification against non-forum shopping; and (3) failure to attach a written explanation for non-personal service and filing. On January 15, 2003, the RTC dismissed the claim without prejudice, and on April 9, 2003, it denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration. Petitioner then elevated the matter to the Supreme Court by a petition for reviCase Digest (G.R. No. 93867)
Facts:
- Probate Proceedings
- The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iligan City, Branch 6, admitted to probate the holographic will of Alice O. Sheker and issued a notice for creditors to file claims against the estate.
- Petitioner Alan Joseph A. Sheker filed, on October 7, 2002, a contingent claim for:
- Agent’s commission of approximately ₱206,250.00, payable upon sale of certain estate lands.
- Reimbursement of expenses amounting to ₱275,000.00, incurred or to be incurred in negotiating the sale of those lands.
- Motion to Dismiss and RTC Orders
- Respondent executrix moved to dismiss the money claim for:
- Non-payment of the requisite docket fee under Section 7(a), Rule 141 of the Rules of Court.
- Failure to attach a certification against non-forum shopping.
- Failure to attach a written explanation why the claim was not personally filed and served.
- On January 15, 2003, the RTC dismissed the money claim without prejudice; on April 9, 2003, it denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration.
- Petition for Review on Certiorari
- Petitioner brought a petition for review on certiorari to the Supreme Court, raising three main questions of law.
- The Supreme Court gave due course to the petition pursuant to Section 2(c), Rule 41 of the Rules of Court.
Issues:
- Certification Against Non-Forum Shopping
- Must a contingent money claim in probate include a certification against non-forum shopping, failing which it is subject to dismissal?
- Payment of Docket Fees
- Must a contingent money claim in probate be dismissed for failure to pay docket fees upon filing?
- Written Explanation for Non-Personal Filing
- Must a contingent money claim in probate be dismissed for failure to attach a written explanation why the claim was not personally filed and served?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)