In the Matter of the Estate of Edward E. Christensen vs. Adolfo C. Aznar GR No.

L-16749

FACTS:

EDWARD Christensen died testate. The estate was distributed by Executioner Aznar according to the
will, which provides that: Php 3,600 be given to HELEN Christensen as her legacy, and the rest of his
estate to his daughter LUCY Christensen, as pronounced by CFI Davao.

Opposition to the approval of the project of partition was filed by Helen, insofar as it deprives her of her
legitime as an acknowledged natural child, she having been declared by Us an acknowledged natural
child of the deceased Edward in an earlier case.

As to his citizenship, we find that the citizenship that he acquired in California when he resided in
Sacramento from 1904 to 1913, was never lost by his stay in the Philippines, and the deceased appears
to have considered himself as a citizen of California by the fact that when he executed his will he
declared that he was a citizen of that State; so that he appears never to have intended to abandon his
California citizenship by acquiring another. But at the time of his death, he was domiciled in the
Philippines.

ISSUE: What law on succession should apply, the Philippine law or the California law?

HELD:

The Supreme Court deciding to grant more successional rights to Helen Christensen Garcia said in effect
that there be two rules in California on the matter.

1. The conflict rule which should apply to Californian’s outside the California, and

2. The internal Law which should apply to California domiciles in califronia.

The California conflict rule, found on Art. 946 of the California Civil code States that “if there is no law to
the contrary in the place where personal property is situated, it is deemed to follow the decree of its
owner and is governed by the law of the domicile.”

Christensen being domiciled outside california, the law of his domicile, the Philippines is ought to be
followed.

Wherefore, the decision appealed is reversed and case is remanded to the lower court with instructions
that partition be made as that of the Philippine law provides.