Santillon vs.

Miranda 14 SCRA 563, June 30, 1965, L-19281

Bengzon, C.J.

Facts: Pedro Santillon died intestate and the principal parties of his estate are his only son Claro Santillon and
his wife Perfecta Miranda. Four years after his dead Claro petitioned for letters of administration but was
opposed by the widow Perfecta on the grounds that the properties were conjugal, that she conveyed ¾ of
her undivided share to spouses Benito and Rosario, that the administration of the estate was not necessary
due to a pending case for partition of the property and she be the one better qualified as administrator. Claro
motioned to declare the share of heirs where he invokes that Art. 892 of the New Civil Code where after
deducting ½ from the conjugal property for Perfecta’s share, the remaining ½ must be ¼ for her
(widow) and ¾ for him (only child). Perfecta, on the other hand, claimed that under Art. 996 she is entitled
to ½ of the estate after her conjugal property.

Issue: Whether or not a surviving spouse concurring with a legitimate child is entitled to ½ of the intestate
estate?

Held: Yes. Art 892 falls under the chapter on Testamentary Succession while Art 996 comes under the
chapter on Legal or Intestate Succession. It is obvious that Claro cannot rely on Art 892 because it merely
fixes the legitime of the surviving spouse and Art 888 the legitime of children in testate succession, it does not
fix the amount of the shares that such child and spouse are entitled to when intestacy occurs.