[No. 10033. August 30, 1917.

THE CITY OF MANILA, petitioner and appellant, vs. THE

ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF MANILA and
THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE ESTATE OF MARIA
CONCEPCION SARMIENTO, interveners and appellees.

ESCHEAT; WHEN MAY PROPERTY BE DECLARED

ESCHEATED.—Under the provisions of section 750 of Act No.
190 property may be declared escheated when a person dies
intestate, seized of real or personal property, leaving no heir or
person by law entitled to the same. In the present case the
deceased disposed of her property by a will and left heirs
entitled to inherit the same. The will clearly, definitely and
unequivocally designated what disposition should be made of
the property in question. The property in question is still being
administered in accordance with the terms of the will for the
benefit of the real beneficiary as was intended by the original
owner.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of

Manila. Crossfield, J.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
City Attorney Escaler for appellant.
William A. Kincaid and Thomas L. Hartigan for the
appellee Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila.
No appearance f or the other appellee.

JOHNSON, J.:

This action was commenced in the Court of First Instance

of the city of Manila on the 15th day of February, 1913. Its
purpose was to have declared escheated to the city of
Manila certain property situated in and around said city;
that said property consists of five parcels of land located in
the districts of Malate and Paco of the city of Manila, as
shown in a plan, in the office of the Department of
Engineering and Public Works of said city of Manila, No. B-
10-27. The theory of the plaintiff is that one Ana Sarmiento
was the owner of said property and died in the year 1668
without leaving "heir or person entitled to the same."
After hearing the evidence, the Honorable A. S.
Crossfield, in a carefully prepared opinion, reached the con-

816

816 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

/
 City of Manila vs. Archbishop of Manila.

clusion that the prayer of the plaintiff should be denied

without any finding as to costs. From that conclusion the
plaintiff appealed to this court and made a number of
assignments of error.
After an examination of the evidence adduced during the
trial of the cause, we find that the following facts were
proved by a large preponderance of the evidence: That Ana
Sarmiento resided, with her husband, in the city of Manila
sometime prior to the 17th day of November, 1668; that on
said date she made a will; that on the 23d day of
November, 1668, she added a codicil to said will; that on
the 19th day of May, 1669, she made another will, making
a part thereof the said codicil of November 23d, 1668; that
said will contained provisions for the establishment of a
"Capellanía de Misas;" that the first chaplain of said
capellanía should be her nephew Pedro del Castillo; that
said will contained a provision for the administration of
said property in relation with the said "Capellanía de
Misas" succeeding that of her nephew Pedro del Castillo;
that such subsequent administration should continue
perpetually; that said Ana Sarmiento died about the year
1672; that for more than two hundred years the intervener,
the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila, through his
various agencies, has administered said property; that the
Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila has rightfully and
legally succeeded to the possession and administration of
said property in accordance with the terms and provisions
of the will of Ana Sarmiento.
Section 750 of Act No. 190 provides when property may
be declared escheated. It provides, "when a person dies
intestate, seized of real or personal property * * * leaving
no heir or person by law entitled to the same," that then
and in that case such property, under the procedure
provided for by sections 751 and 752, may be declared
escheated.
The proof shows that Ana Sarmiento did not die
intestate. She left a will. The will provides for the
administration of said property by her nephew as well as
for the subsequent administration of the same. She did not
die without

817

VOL. 36, AUGUST 30, 1917 817

United States vs. Gampoña.

an heir nor without persons entitled to administer her

estate. It further shows that she did not die without
leaving a person by law entitled to inherit her property. In
view of those facts, therefore, the property in question
cannot be declared escheated as of the property of Ana
/
 Sarmiento. If by any chance the property may be declared
escheated, it must be based upon the fact that persons
subsequent to Ana Sarmiento died intestate without
leaving heir or person by law entitled to the same.
The will clearly, definitely and unequivocally defines
and designates what disposition shall be made of the
property in question. The heir mentioned in said will
evidently accepted its terms and permitted the property to
be administered in accordance therewith. And, so far as the
record shows, it is still being administered in accordance
with the terms of said will for the benefit of the real
beneficiary as was intended by the original owner.
The record fully and completely shows that the theory of
the plaintiff is without foundation either in fact or in law.
The judgment of the lower court is, therefore, hereby
affirmed, with costs in this instance. So ordered.

Arellano, C. J., Araullo, Street, and Malcolm, JJ.,

concur.

Judgment affirmed.

_________________

© Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.