You are on page 1of 1

17 Testate Estate of the Deceased Carlos Gurrea, Marcelo Pijuan, Issue: WON Mrs.

Issue: WON Mrs. Gurrea has a right of preference for appointment as


special administratoer-appellee v. Manuela Vda de. Gurrea administratrix
G.R. No. L-21917 November 29, 1966
Held: NO.

Topic: Settlement of Decedents’ Estates -- What are the rules for [DOCTRINE] The preference, accorded by Section 5 of Rule 78 of the
appointment and removal of executor or administrator? Revised Rules of Court to the surviving spouse, for appointment as
administrator or administratrix of the estate of the deceased, exists "if no
Doctrine: The preference, accorded by Section 5 of Rule 78 of the Revised executor is named in the will or the executor or executors are incompetent,
Rules of Court to the surviving spouse, for appointment as administrator or refuse the trust, or fail to give bond, or a person dies intestate." This right of
administratrix of the estate of the deceased, exists "if no executor is named preference refers to the appointment of a regular administrator, not to that of
in the will or the executor or executors are incompetent, refuse the trust, or a special administrator.
fail to give bond, or a person dies intestate."
None of these conditions obtains, however, in the case at bar. The
This right of preference refers to the appointment of a regular administrator, deceased Carlos Gurrea has left a document purporting to be his will,
not to that of a special administrator. seemingly, is still pending probate. So, it cannot be said, as yet, that he
has died intestate.
Facts:
1. Mrs. Gurrea and Carlos Gurrea were married in Spain. Carlos Again, said document names Marcelo Pijuan as executor thereof, and it is
Gurrea abandoned Mrs. Gurrea and moved to the Philippines with not claimed that he is incompetent therefor. What is more, he has not only
his son, Teodoro. not refused the trust, but, has, also, expressly accepted it, by applying
2. Carlos Gurrea lived with Rizalina Perez by whom he had 2 children. for his appointment as executor, and, upon his appointment as special
3. Years later, Mrs. Gurrea went to the Philippines. But, Carlos Gurrea administrator, has assumed the duties thereof. It may not be amiss to
refused to admit her in his residence. note that the preference accorded by the aforementioned provision of the
4. Mrs. Gurrea instituted a civil case for support. RTC granted. CA Rules of Court to the surviving spouse refers to the appointment of a regular
reduced to P1,000. administrator or administratrix, not to that of a special administrator, and that
5. Carlos Gurrea died, leaving a leaving a document purporting to be the order appointing the latter lies within the discretion of the probate
his last will and testament, in which he named Marcelo Pijuan as' court,and is not appealable.
executor thereof and disinherited Mrs. Gurrea and their son, Teodoro
6. Pijuan instituted a special procedings of CFI-Negros Occidentail for
probate of said will. Dispositive Portion: WHEREFORE, the orders appealed from are hereby
 Pijuan was, upon his ex parte motion, appointed special modified, in the sense that Manuela Ruiz Vda. de Gurrea shall receive from
administrator of the estate, without bond. the estate of the' deceased a monthly allowance of P1,000.00, by way of
support, from March 7, 1962, and that, in all other respects, said orders are
7. Mrs. Gurrea filed in said Special Proceedings No. 6582, a motion hereby affirmed, without pronouncement as to costs. It is so ordered.
alleging that the aforementioned alimony, pendente lite, of P1,000 a
month, had been suspended upon the death of Carlos Gurrea, and
praying that the Special Administrator be ordered to continue paying
it pending the final determination of the case. --- DENIED.
8. Mrs. Gurrea also moved for her appointment as administratrix of the
estate of the deceased. --- DENIED.
9. Mrs. Gurrea’s contention:the lower court erred in denying her petition
for appointment as administratrix, for, as widow of the deceased, she
claims a right of preference under Section 5. of Rule 78 of the
Revised Rules of Court.

You might also like