Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
76Activity

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Digests for Persons Compilation v1.0

Digests for Persons Compilation v1.0

Ratings: (0)|Views: 7,307 |Likes:
Published by cmv mendoza

More info:

Published by: cmv mendoza on Dec 09, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/23/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Mars Veloso 1C, 2006-2007
Persons Digests v1.0
 
Page No. 1
FOREWORD
 The sixty or so pages that follow are filled with digests I’vemade, compiled, and/or edited (for Persons and FamilyRelations under Prof. Avila) in the span of months thathave made up my first semester of freshman year in theUniversity of the Philippines, College of Law. This isn’t, takenote, a product from the bar-review school or, in the wordsof the Family Code, the school of arts and trade… but froma normal, struggling, oftentimes harassed student of 
the
College of Law. Read with caution. And if, by chance, ithelps you through a session of recitation, read with stark,brazen admiration.
1
Although far from being the definitive guide to the cases,professors being prone to asking inconsequential details(not to mention the glaring fact that these were mostlyauthored by an amateur), I think these summarized digestsoffer enough a starting point to tackle the issues based ona student’s perspective as opposed to the oftentimesconfusing
 ponencias
written primarily, in my opinion, tothwart a law student’s understanding of the case andconsequently aggravate his/her tenure in law school. This is a summative compilation made by freshmen forfreshmen. It’s not exactly the most encouraging of linesbut it’ll do for now.
2
 
For the Sigma Rho! For the Grand  Archon! Fight!
1
I just had to put that in. Don’t worry. It’s still going to be revised in the future.Really.
2
I plan to publish this thing one way or another for future freshmen and as a personalreference material. If I get kicked out of law school, this’ll be my mark on the place.Imagine a dog taking a piss in Malcolm Hall, marking his spot as he passes throughthe corridors that have marked the advent of legal history, and you will have somevague idea of what this compilation is all about. Foreword to be completed andcompilation to be distributed when the future 1Cs start scratching their headswondering why they paid money to subject themselves to this enlightened version of torment.
 
Mars Veloso 1C, 2006-2007
Persons Digests v1.0
 
Page No. 2
 
Mars Veloso 1C, 2006-2007
Persons Digests v1.0
 
Page No. 3
 Joaquin v. Navarro
May 29, 1953 (257 Phil. 93), Tuason, J.
Nature:
 Three proceedings instituted in CFIManila were heard jointly and weregiven a single decision. This wasappealed to the CA, whose decisionmodified the former. A subsequentappeal to the SC ensued.
Facts:
Feb. 6, 1946 – While the battle for theliberation of Manila was raging, thespouses of JN, Sr. and AJ (mother of petitioner), together with their threedaughters P, C, and N, and their son JN, Jr. and the latter’s wife, AC, soughtrefuge in the ground floor of thebuilding known as the German Club, atthe corner of San Marcelino and SanLuis Streets of the city. Building waspacked with refugees, shells wereexploding around, the Club was set onfire, and the Japanese were shootingthose who tried to escape. Threedaughters were shot and died. JN, Sr.and son decided to abandon thepremises to seek safer haven. AJremained. Upon attempting to escape, JN, Jr. was shot and died. Minutes later,the Club, already on fire, collapsed. JN,Sr. and daughter-in-law died threedays later. Friend and former neighborFL who escaped with JN, Sr. from thebuilding, survived to narrate the story. The RTC claims that the mother,natural child of petitioner Joaquin,survived the son; the son dying firstbefore the mother. CA claimed thereverse. If the son died first, petitionerwould reap the benefits of succession.If the mother died first, the respondentAntonio, son of JN, Jr. by his firstmarriage, would inherit.Decision was reviewed by the SC.
Issues/ Held/Ratio:
(1) WON the discussion of section 69(ii) of Rule 123 of the Rules of Courthaving repealed Art. 43 of the CC ornot is relevant to the case at bar.No. Neither of the two provisions isapplicable. Both provisions, as theirlanguage implies, are intended as asubstitute for facts, and so are not tobe available when there are facts.
3
 (2) WON the mother died before theson or vice versa.No. The son died first. The facts areadequate to solve the problem of survivorship without the need forstatutory presumptions. Thepresumption that AJ, the mother, diedfirst is based purely on surmises,speculations, or conjectures withoutany sure foundation in the evidence. The opposite theory is deduced fromestablished facts which, weighed withcommon experience, engender theinference as a very strong probability.
Carrillo v. Jaojoco & Jaojoco
March 24, 1925 (956 Phil. 46), Avancena, J.
Nature:
Miguela Carrillo, as sister of deceasedAdriana Carrillo and currentadministratrix of the latter’s estate,brought action to the CFI Cavite for theannulment of the document of becauseher sister was declared mentallyincapacitated nine days after thetransaction. The defendants were
3
Rule 123, section 69 (ii) of the Revised Rules of Court reads: “When two persons perish in thesame calamity, such as wreck, battle, orconflagration, and it is not (1) shown who diedfirst, and there are no (2) particularcircumstances from which it can be inferred, thesurvivorship is presumed from the probabilitiesresulting from the strength and age of the sexesaccording to the following rules…Article 43 of the CC is of the following tenor:“Whenever a doubt arises as to which was thefirst to die of the two or more persons who wouldinherit one from the other, the person whoalleges the prior death of either must prove theallegation; in the absence of proof thepresumption shall be that they died at the sametime, and no transmission of rights from one tothe other shall take place.”

Activity (76)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
huge285 liked this
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
vjoucher liked this
ramilfleco liked this
Tani Angub liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->