PRELIMINARIES Define Action Define Special Proceeding Action v. Special Proceeding Cases: 1) Hagans v.

Wislezenus, 42 Phil 880 (1920) 2) Natcher v. Court of Appeals, 366 SCRA 386 (2001) 3) Vda. De Manalo v. Court of Appeals, 349 SCRA 135 (2001) 366 SCRA 752 (2001) JURISDICTION Extent of Jurisdiction – BP 129, as amended Cases: 1) Mangaliman v. Gonzales, 36 SCRA 462 (1970) 2) Baybayan v. Aquino, 149 SCRA 185 (1987) 3) Fernandez v. Maravilla, 10 SCRA 589 (1964) 4) Manalo v. Paredes, 47 Phil 938 (1925) RULE 72 - SUBJECT MATTER AND APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL RULES Relate to other provisions of the ROC Case: 1) Fernandez v. Maravilla, supra RULE 73 – VENUE AND PROCESS Steps to determine which court has jurisdiction When does the court acquire jurisdiction? Settlement of estate upon dissolution of marriage Presumption of Death - Article 390 to 392 of the CC Cases: 1) Salazar v. CFI of Laguna, 64 Phil 78 (1937) 2) Cayetano v. Leonidas, 129 SCRA 522 (1984) 3) In re Kaw Singco, 74 Phil 239 (1943) 4) Garcia Fule v. Court of Appeals, 74 SCRA 189 (1976) 5) Cuenco v. Court of Appeals, 53 SCRA 360 (1973) 6) Ongsingco v. Tan, 97 Phil 330 (1955) 7) Eusebio v. Eusebio, 100 Phil 593 (1956) 8) Sandoval v. Santiago, 83 Phil 784 (1949) 9) Vda. De Manzanero v. CFI of Batangas, 61 Phil 850 (1935) 10) Benedicto v. Javellana, 10 Phil 197 (1908) 11) Casiano v. Maloto, 70 SCRA 232 (1977) 12) Cuizon v. Ramolete, 129 SCRA 495 (1984) 13) Bernardo v. Court of Appeals, 7 SCRA 367 (1963) 14) Uriarte v. CFI of Negros Occidental, 33 SCRA 252 (1970)

Vda. 47 Phil 776 (1925) De la Rama v. 98 Phil 574 (1956) RULE 74 – SUMMARY SETTLEMENT OF ESTATES Different modes of intestate settlement Requisites of a valid extrajudicial settlement Nature of summary settlement Requisites for a valid summary settlement of an estate of small value Extrajudicial Settlement v. 68 Phil 727 (1939) Alfonso v. Roman Catholic. 56 SCRA 266 (1974) Del Rosario v. 174 SCRA 154 (1939) 9) Jerez v. Santos. 7 Phil 745 (1907) Villacorte v. Montejo. ALLOWANCE OF WILL NECESSARY RULE 76 – ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE OF WILLS Nature of probate of a will Effect of allowance or disallowance of a will Jurisdictional requirements for probate of a will Scope of inquiry on proceeding to probate will Proof required on probate hearing Binding force of trial court order allowing or disallowing a will When jurisdiction vest Cases: 1) Fernandez v. Republic. De Jesus. Mariano. 66 Phil 302 (1938) 2) Hernandez v. 66 Phil 594 (1938) Ocampo v. Court of Appeals. Ramagosa. 52 Phil 870 (1929) De la Rama v. 64 SCRA 452 (1975) 5) Pastor Jr. 21 Phil 211 (1912) 8) Pereira v.15) 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) 21) 22) 23) 24) 25) 26) 27) PCIB v. 10 SCRA 185 (1964) 4) Arcillas v. Martinez. 1 SCRA 521 (1961) 7) McMicking v. 21 SCRA 428 (1967) 2) Mercado v. 67 Phil 652 (1939) Dolar v. Natividad. De la Rama. 26 SCRA 197 (1968) 5) Ermac v. 6 Phil 240 (1906) Cruz v. Agcaoili. Torres. 89 Phil 342 (1951) Calma v. 25 Phil 437 (1913) Fulgencio v. De la Rama. v. 66 SCRA 215 (1938) 3) Sumilang v. Gatchalian. 21 Phil 252 (1912) Lukban v. 122 SCRA 885 (1983) . Tanedo. Medelo. 30 SCRA 905 (1969) RULE 75 – PRODUCTION OF WILL. 21 SCRA 1369 (1967) 4) Balanay v. Sy Conbieng. Court of Appeals. Natividad. Del Rosario. 78 Phil 196 (1947) 3) Torres v. Andal. Dimagiba. De Garcia. 64 SCRA 359 (1975) 6) Carreon v. Nietes. Potenciano 89 Phil 160 (1951) Prado v. Escolin. Summary Settlement Cases: 1) Utulo v.

Crisostomo. 6 Phil 459 (1906) 11) Lim Billian v. Abut. Palmaroli. Paredes. 39 Phil 156 (1918) 15) Abut v. 54 Phil 610 (1930) 3) Miciano v. 42 Phil 145 (1921) 22) Solivio v. 64 Phil 75 (1937) . Administrator Other ground for disqualification or incompetency When are letters of administration granted Kinds of administrators Interest required to oppose issuance of letters testamentary Special Administrator Bond of executor and administrator Inventory and Appraisal Powers and duties of executor and administrator Accountability and compensation of executor and administrator Action by and against executor and administrator Cases: 1) Guerrero v. 90 Phil 459 (1951) RULE 78 – RULE 85 AND RULE 87 Who may serve as executors and administrators Executor v. Borja. 95 Phil 500 (1954) 2) Fluemer v. Court of Appeals. 34 Phil 291 (1916) 21) Avera v. 63 Phil 793 (1936) 12) Basa v. 47 Phil 548 (1925) 20) Cabang v. 119 SCRA 16 (1982) 17) Gan v. Mercado. 13 Phil 212 (1909) 2) Navas v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Co. Celis. De Jaen. 50 Phil 867 (1924) 4) Leon & Ghezzi v. 182 SCRA 119 (1990) 23) Manalo v. 161 SCRA 628 (1988) 14) In re Estate of Johnson. Del Val. Teran. 45 SCRA 326 (1972) 16) Rodelas v. 44 Phil 711 (1923) 3) Mercado v. Yap. Chiu Guimco. Manahan. Mamuyac. Suntay. Galing. Suntay. 40 Phil 105 (1919) 25) Manahan v. 104 Phil509 (1958) 18) Gago v. Aranza. Brimo. 36 Phil 917 (1917) 7) Rodriguez v. 61 Phil 632 (1935) 13) De Aranz v. Delfinado. 49 Phil 902 (1927) 19) Aldanese v. 17 SCRA 418 (1966) 8) Teotico v. supra 24) Riera v. Garcia. Salutillo. 90 SCRA 585 (1951) 10) Araujo v.. 58 Phil 448 (1933) RULE 77 – ALLOWANCE OF WILL PROVED OUTSIDE OF THE PHILIPPINES Article 815 to 817 of the CC Requisites of probate of a will allowed in a foreign state Cases: 1) Suntay v. Vda. 13 SCRA 406 (1965) 9) Fernando v.6) US v. Garcia. Hix.

43 Phil 437 32) Nicolas v Nicolas. 5 SCRA 313 (1962) 11) Duran v. Camon. Sian. 93 Phil 416 (1953) 5) De Guzman v. National Bank. Lllemos. 53 Phil 155 (1929) 23) Degala v. 169 SCRA 702 (1989) 41) Aguas v. 50 Phil 128 (1927) 27) Santero v. v. 89 Phil 710 10) Gutierrez v. Quebral. 5 SCRA 959 (1962) 42) Melgar v Buenviaje. Angeles. 43 Phil 175 (1922) 8) Gutierrez de Ocampo v. Valera Calderon. Pecson. Crisostomo. 182 SCRA 729 (1990) 36) Rosenstock v. 18 SCRA 898 (1966) 16) Tan v. Limcolioc. De Gurrea. 7 SCRA 367 (1963) 45) Guanco v. v. Ceniza and Umipig. 28 Phil 137 (1914) 47) Heirs of Gregoire v. 20 SCRA 379 12) De Guzman v. 28 SCRA 1008 (1969) 31) Garcia v. Cusi Jr. 69 Phil 1 (1939) 29) San Diego v. Duran. Joson. 59 Phil 631 9) Trillana v. Wagner. 162 SCRA 347 (1988) 13) Garcia Fule v. Elser. Maralit. 53 Phil 824 (1928) 35) Lacson v. gernandez. 51 Phil 75 (1927) 48) Velasquez v. Harvey.4) Ozaeta v. Court of Appeals. Escudero. IAC. 176 SCRA 340 44) Bernardo v. 69 Phil 383 (1940) 26) Moore & Sons Mercantile Co. 11 SCRA 165 (1964) 30) Jaroda v. Luzon Surety. 57 Phil 411 (1932) 25) Adapon v. Rear. Imperial. 179 SCRA 196 (1989) 43) Pajarillo v. Nombre. George. 2 SCRA 83 38) Philippine Trust Co. 63 Phil 332 (1936) 33) Uy Tioco v. 78 Phil 791 24) Chua Tan v Del Rosario. Abada. 64 Phil 134 (1937) 22) Gustilo v. Pecson and BPI. Pacheco. 46 Phil 200 (1924) 17) Lizzarga Hermanos v. 95 Phil 924 (1954) 19) Wilson v. 40 Phil 124 18) Warner Barnes v. 125 SCRA 456 (1983) . Luzon Surety. 153 SCRA 728 28) Concepcion Jocson de Hilado v. Aguinaldo. 68 Phil 673 (1939) 6) Gonzales v. Go Chiong Lee. 127 SCRA 295 (1984) 21) Cosme de Mendoza v. 82 Phil 407 (1948) 15) Pijuan v. Gorospe. supra 14) Roxas v. Baker. CFI of Cavite. Villegas. CA. Vda. 48 Phil 708 (1925) 37) Joson v. 55 Phil 44 20) Luzon Surety v. Nava. 2 SCRA 122 (1951) 39) Dela Cruz v. 53 Phil 802 (1928) 34) Dacanay v.. Reyes. 190 SCRA 112 (1990) 7) Johannes v. 16 SCRA 886 (1966) 40) Quirino v. 54 Phil 244 (1930) 46) Alafriz v Mina.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful