Case Digest (G.R. No. 45248)
Facts:
In the Matter of the Will of the Deceased Eugenia Zuniga del Rosario, G.R. No. 45248, April 18, 1939, the Supreme Court En Banc, Concepcion, J., writing for the Court.
Vicente Reyes Villavicencio was the executor and applicant-appellee; Santiago Quinio et al. were oppositors and appellants, thirty relatives of the testatrix within the fifth degree in the collateral line. Eugenia Zuniga del Rosario died in Batangas on December 19, 1934, leaving a will executed with formalities; the will was probated on February 1, 1935 over opposition.
The contested provision was the third clause of the will, which directed that the fruits of her lands and the rents of her house and warehouse be devoted to masses and alms for the repose of her soul and those of certain named relatives and for the benefit of the Catholic Church in Batangas. The clause specified daily masses for three years, thereafter two masses a year for the testatrix, and various annual masses and two annual alms of P10 each to local devotions.
Thereafter, Santiago Quinio and twenty-eight relatives filed a motion, with the conformity of the Bishop of Lipa, asking to be declared heirs but charged with the duty to comply with the will. They stated they had an understanding with the Bishop that, within ninety days from their adjudication of the estate, they would deposit funds with the Bishop and in a bank to cover the required masses and alms. The executor opposed. The court (below) denied the movants’ petition by order dated March 30, 1936. The movants appealed that order to the Supreme Court.
The appellants contended that even after compliance with the will’s directions, a balance would remain and that the testatrix theref...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the testatrix’s will dispose of the entire fruits and income of the properties such that collateral relatives within the fifth degree have no right to succeed to any remainder (i.e., was there partial intestacy)?
- Can the private arrangement between the oppositors-appellants and the Bishop of Lipa validate a scheme that would alter or defeat the testamentary dispositions?
- Did the lower court err in denying the petition of the oppositors-appellants and in refusing to declare them heirs ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)