To: RMA

Fr: LFT
Re: Case Problem in Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate

CASE PROBLEM:

1. Silverio died intestate leaving a 300 square meter lot in Caloocan City. He
had 3 children: Froilan, Geronimo, and Heraldes. The heirs then decided to
execute an extrajudicial settlement of estate, adjudicating and dividing the lot
as follows:
a. Froilan will get Lot A which has an area of 100 sq. m;
b. Geronimo will get Lot B which has an area of 150 sq. m;
c. Heraldes will get Lot C, which has an area of 50 sq. m.

Due to Lot C being an interior lot, a 3-meter wide easement of right of way
was constituted in favor of Lot C, as the dominant estate, by Lot A and B, as
servient estates.

After some time, Mr. Oropesa, a representative of the Department of

Transportation approached G regarding the planned MRT line-7 extension
project. It will traverse parts of Metro Manila, with the Terminal Station being
set up in Bulacan. Among the properties to be affected by the project are Lots
A, B, and C.
Mr. Oropesa then offered Php 2,000,000.00 as Just Compensation for the
taking of a portion of the affected lots. Unbeknown to Mr. Oropesa, Froilan
recently died and Heraldes was on a year-long spiritual retreat in Israel.
Geronimo then consulted his lawyer, and thereafter signed the right-of-way
agreement in behalf of Froilan and Heraldes. Geronimo also showed Mr.
Oropesa a falsified Special Power of Attorney allegedy executed by Froilan and
Heraldes authorizing Geronimo to receive their share of the Php
2,000,000.00. Word got out and Koko, Lando, and Mario, the heirs of
Froilan, learned of the infrastructure project planned and the payment of Just
Compensation. Koko, Lando, and Mario immediately informed Mr. Oropesa
and the latter ordered the stoppage of payment to Geronimo until the
situation is sorted out.