Professional Documents
Culture Documents
administering her estate and he should be the one appointed as its administrator;
that as part owner of the mass of conjugal properties left by Cristina, he must be
accorded legal preference in the administration
8. After a failed attempt by the parties to settle the proceedings amicably, Federico
filed a Manifestation dated March 13, 1999, nominating his adopted son, Emilio III,
as administrator of the decedents estate on his behalf. Subsequently, the trial
court granted Emilio IIIs Motion for Leave
to Intervene considering his interest in the outcome of the case.
9. In the course of the proceedings, on November 13, 2000, Federico died.
10. The trial court rendered a decision on November 9, 2001, appointing herein
petitioner, Emilio III, as administrator of decedent Cristinas intestate estate.What
matters most at this time is the welfare of the estate of the decedent in the light of
such unfortunate and bitter estrangement. The Court honestly believes that to
appoint the petitioner would go against the wishes of the decedent who raised
[Emilio III] from infancy in her home in Baguio City as her own child. Certainly, it
would go against the wishes of the surviving spouse x x x who nominated [Emilio
III] for appointment as administrator.
11. Aggrieved, respondent filed an appeal before the CA, which reversed and set
aside the decision of the RTC, revoked the Letters of Administration issued to
Emilio III. In marked contrast, the CA zeroed in on Emilio IIIs status as an
illegitimate child of Emilio I and, thus, barred from representing his deceased
father in the estate of the latters legitimate mother, the decedent. That he cannot
be appointed for the ff reasons:
i. The appointment of Emilio III was subject to a suspensive condition,
i.e., Federicos
appointment as administrator of the estate
ii. As between the legitimate offspring (respondent) and illegitimate
offspring (Emilio III) of
decedents son, Emilio I, respondent is
preferred, being the "next of kin" referred to by
Section 6, Rule 78 of
the Rules of Court
iii. Jurisprudence has consistently held that Article 992 of the Civil Code
bars the illegitimate
child from inheriting ab intestato from the legitimate
children and relatives of his father or
mother.
Facts:
1. On June 4, 1990, the decedent, Cristina Aguinaldo-Suntay (Cristina), married to
Dr. Federico Suntay (Federico), died intestate.
~ In 1979, their only son, Emilio Aguinaldo Suntay (Emilio I), predeceased both
Cristina and Federico.
~ At the time of her death, Cristina was survived by her husband, Federico, and
several grandchildren, including herein petitioner Emilio A.M. Suntay III (Emilio III)
and respondent Isabel Cojuangco-Suntay
2. Emilio I was married to Isabel Cojuangco, and they begot three children,
namely: herein respondent, Isabel; Margarita; and Emilio II
3. Emilio Is marriage to Isabel Cojuangco was subsequently annulled. Thereafter,
Emilio I had two children out of wedlock, Emilio III and Nenita Suntay Taedo
(Nenita), by two different women, Concepcion Mendoza and Isabel Santos,
respectively.
4. Consequently, respondent and her siblings Margarita and Emilio II, lived with
their mother on Balete Drive, Quezon City, separately from their father and
paternal grandparents.
5. Parenthetically, after the death of Emilio I, Federico filed a petition for visitation
rights over his grandchildren. It was altogether stopped because of a manifestation
filed by
respondent Isabel, articulating her sentiments on the unwanted visits of her
grandparents.
ISSUE :
6. After her spouses death, Federico, after the death of his spouse, Cristina, or on
September 27, 1993, adopted their illegitimate grandchildren, Emilio III and Nenita A. IN THE APPOINTMENT OF AN ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE UNDER
7. On October 26, 1995, respondent filed a petition for the issuance of letters of
SECTION 6 OF RULE 78 OF THE RULES OF COURT, WHETHER ARTICLE
administration in her favor. Federico filed his opposition. Being the surviving
992 OF THE CIVIL CODE APPLIES; and
spouse of Cristina, he is capable of
1
Ruling:
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals in
CA-G.R. CV No. 74949 is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Letters of Administration
over the estate of decedent Cristina Aguinaldo-Suntay shall issue to both
petitioner Emilio A.M. Suntay III and respondent Isabel Cojuangco-Suntay upon
payment by each of a bond to be set by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 78,
Malolos, Bulacan, in Special Proceeding Case No. 117-M-95. The Regional Trial
In the appointment of an administrator, the principal consideration is the interest in Court, Branch 78, Malolos, Bulacan is likewise directed to make a determination
the estate of the one to be appointed. The order of preference does not rule out
and to declare the heirs of decedent Cristina Aguinaldo-Suntay according to the
the appointment of co-administrators, especially in cases where justice and equity actual factual milieu as proven by the parties, and all other persons with legal
demand that opposing parties or factions be represented in the management of
interest in the subject estate. It is further directed to settle the estate of decedent
the estates, a situation which obtains here.
Cristina Aguinaldo-Suntay with dispatch. No costs.
The basis for Article 992 of the Civil Code, referred to as the iron curtain bar rule,
is quite the opposite scenario in the facts obtaining herein for the actual
relationship between Federico and Cristina, on one hand, and Emilio III, on the
other, was akin to the normal relationship of legitimate relatives;
Similarly, the subject estate in this case calls to the succession other putative
heirs, including another illegitimate grandchild of Cristina and Federico, Nenita
Taedo, but who was likewise adopted by Federico, and the two (2) siblings of
respondent Isabel, Margarita and Emilio II. In all, considering the conflicting claims
of the putative heirs, and the unliquidated conjugal partnership of Cristina and
Federico which forms part of their respective estates, we are impelled to move in
only one direction,i.e., joint administration of the subject estate.
SO ORDERED.
Carpio, (Chairperson), Peralta, Abad, and Perez,* JJ., concur.
1. The Court cannot subscribe to the appellate courts ruling excluding Emilio III in
the administration of the decedents undivided estate. The underlying philosophy
of our law on intestate succession is to give preference to the wishes and
presumed will of the decedent, absent a valid and effective will
One final note. Counsel for petitioner meticulously argues that Article 992 of the
The basis for Article 992 of the Civil Code, referred to as the iron curtain bar rule,
Civil Code, the successional bar between the legitimate and illegitimate relatives of is quite the opposite scenario in the facts obtaining herein for the actual
a decedent, does not apply in this instance where facts indubitably demonstrate
relationship between Federico and
the contrary - Emilio III, an illegitimate grandchild of the decedent, was actually
Cristina, on one hand, and Emilio III. Both spouses acknowledged Emilio III as
treated by the decedent and her husband as their own son, reared from infancy, their grandchild. Cristinas properties forming part of her estate are still
educated and trained in their businesses, and eventually legally adopted by
commingled with that of her husband, Federico, because her share in the conjugal
2