Title
Supreme Court
Vizconde vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 118449
Decision Date
Feb 11, 1998
Lauro Vizconde contested inclusion in intestate proceedings of Rafael Nicolas’ estate, disputing collation of Parañaque property acquired via sale proceeds, not gratuitous transfer. SC ruled in his favor, citing limited probate jurisdiction and inapplicability of collation.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 206528)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Family Relations
    • Lauro G. Vizconde (petitioner) married Estrellita Nicolas-Vizconde, daughter of Rafael and Salud Gonzales-Nicolas.
    • Estrellita and Lauro had two daughters, Carmela and Jennifer.
  • Property Transactions
    • May 22, 1979: Estrellita bought a 10,110-sqm lot in Valenzuela, Bulacan from her father Rafael for ₱135,000; TCT No. V-554 issued.
    • March 30, 1990: Estrellita sold the Valenzuela property to Amelia Lim and Maria Natividad Balictar Chiu for ₱3,405,612.
    • June 1990: With part of the sale proceeds, Estrellita acquired a Parañaque property with improvements from Premiere Homes, Inc.; purchased a car and deposited the balance in bank accounts.
  • Deaths and Extra-Judicial Settlement
    • June 30, 1991: Estrellita and her two daughters were murdered (Vizconde Massacre); NBI found Estrellita died first.
    • Petitioner and his daughters succeeded to Estrellita’s estate; upon the subsequent death of both daughters, petitioner became sole heir.
    • Petitioner, Rafael, and Salud executed an Extra-Judicial Settlement: bank deposits (net ₱3,000,000) split 50/50 between petitioner and Rafael; Parañaque property and car awarded entirely to petitioner; Rafael and Salud waived claims.
  • Intestate Proceedings of Rafael’s Estate
    • November 18, 1992: Rafael died; Sp. Proc. No. C-1679 filed in RTC Caloocan, naming Salud, Ramon, Ricardo, and Antonio’s family as heirs; Teresita de Leon sought appointment as Special Administratrix and guardian ad litem.
    • Ramon Nicolas opposed and later filed Sp. Proc. No. C-1699 to be guardian and to compel collation of properties received by Estrellita, including the Valenzuela and Parañaque properties.
    • November 9, 1993: RTC appointed Ramon guardian and Teresita as Special Administratrix; omitted petitioner and the Parañaque property from the estate.
    • January 5, 1994: RTC removed Ramon as guardian for unauthorized sale of ward’s property.
    • March 10, 1994: RTC granted Ramon’s motion to include petitioner in intestate proceedings and to collate the Parañaque property, car, and remaining proceeds.
    • August 12, 1994: RTC denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, ruling the Valenzuela transfer was gratuitous and the Parañaque property subject to collation.
    • December 14, 1994: Court of Appeals denied petitioner’s certiorari petition.
    • December 4, 1995: Supreme Court gave due course to petitioner’s petition for review on certiorari.

Issues:

  • May petitioner, a son-in-law, be included as a compulsory heir in Rafael’s intestate estate?
  • Can the probate court validly determine the title and consideration of the Valenzuela property transfer?
  • Is the Parañaque property subject to collation in Rafael’s estate?
  • Can proceeds of the Valenzuela property be collated when Estrellita predeceased Rafael and those proceeds were distributed?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.