Case Digest (G.R. No. 222259)
Facts:
Lowella Yap v. Almeda Yap, Hearty Yap‑Dybongco and Diosdado Yap, Jr., G.R. No. 222259, October 17, 2022, Supreme Court Second Division, Leonen, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Lowella Yap and co‑plaintiff Josie May Yap filed a Complaint for partition and accounting (with receivership and preliminary injunction) in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 15, Ozamiz City, claiming that the decedent Diosdado Yap, Sr. left, among his heirs, an acknowledged nonmarital daughter — Lowella. Defendants were the decedent’s surviving wife Almeda Yap, and marital children Hearty Yap‑Dybongco and Diosdado Yap, Jr. Plaintiffs alleged that after the decedent’s death in January 1995 part of the estate was extrajudicially partitioned by respondents without including Lowella and Josie.
Respondents denied that Lowella and Josie were heirs. They asserted that Josie’s true name and parentage were different, and that Lowella’s father was a certain Bernardo Lumahang (to whom Lowella’s mother Matilde Lusterio had been married in 1953). Intervenors Adonis Yap and Adam Lou Yap claimed to be acknowledged nonmarital children of the decedent but later failed to participate. Josie was dropped from the suit for being unlocatable; only Lowella continued prosecution.
At trial Lowella testified she was born April 1, 1961 to Diosdado, Sr. and Matilde, lived with Diosdado, Sr.’s family, worked in his business, and used the name Lowella despite a birth entry as “Nelie.” She introduced documentary evidence including a certificate of registration of birth recorded to Diosdado and Matilde, a Special Power of Attorney by Diosdado, Sr. referring to her as his daughter, photographs, letters in which Almeda signed “Mama Mie,” the decedent’s memorial program listing her as his child, and an affidavit by Diosdado, Sr. attesting to paternity. The Municipal Civil Registrar produced the live birth book entry for Nelie Lusterio Yap showing parents Diosdado Yap and Matilde Rosterio.
Respondents presented certifications from the National Statistics Office indicating no records of a “Lowella” or “Nelie” Yap born April 2, 1961 in NSO files, Matilde’s marriage certificate to Lumahang (January 15, 1953), and birth certificates of children of Matilde and Lumahang. They questioned the authenticity of the Affidavit and Special Power of Attorney and contested the signatures.
The RTC (Presiding Judge Edmundo P. Pintac) found for Lowella and ordered partition of the estate among Lowella and the three respondents, dismissing the intervenors for failure to prosecute. The RTC treated Lowella’s public‑record birth registration and other documents as superior evidence establishing her filial link to Diosdado, Sr., and found the marriage of Matilde to Lumahang irrelevant because Lowella had proven that her father was Diosdado, Sr.
Respondents appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA‑G.R. CV No. 03083‑MIN). The Court of Appeals set aside the RTC’s declaration that Lowella was the decedent’s acknowledged nonmarital daughter, holding that Lowella, having been born during Matilde’s marriage to Lumahang, enjoyed the presumption of legitimacy under Article 164 of the Family Code and that her legitimate status could be impugned only in an action instituted for that purpose by the husband or, in limited cases, his heirs under Articles 170 and 171. The CA therefo...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Procedural: May a child’s presumption of legitimacy under Article 164, Family Code be collaterally impugned in a partition action, or must legitimacy be challenged only by the husband or his heirs through the action to impugn legitimacy under Articles 170–171, Family Code?
- Substantive: Has petitioner Lowella Yap sufficiently rebutted the presumption of legitimacy to establish that she is the nonmarital daughter of Diosdado Yap, Sr., and, if not, should the case be remanded for rece...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)