Family Relations

Title VI: Paternity and Filiation

Chapter 1: Legitimate Children

Legitimate Children

Miller v. Miller y Espenida, G.R. No. 200344

August 28, 2019

Facts: John Miller and Beatriz Marcaida were legally married and bore 4 children,
namely: Glenn, Charles, Betty, and John Jr, all surnamed Miller. After John's death,
Joan Miller, who allegedly is John’s illegitimate child, through her mother Lennie
Espenida, filed before the RTC a Petition for Partition and Accounting of John's estate
with a prayer for preliminary attachment, receivership, support, and damages. Joan
presented her Certificate of Live Birth which showed John to be her registered father.

Glenn filed a separate petition seeking the cancellation of Joan's Certificate of Live Birth
and prayed that the Local Civil Registrar of Gubat, Sorsogon be directed to replace Joan's
surname, Miller, with Espenida, and that Joan use Espenida instead of Miller in all
official documents. Glenn claimed that John did not acknowledge Joan as a natural
child, pointing out that John's signature was not in her birth certificate. It was also not
shown that John knew and consented that his name would be indicated in the certificate.

Joan countered Glenn’s claims contending that while her alleged father did not sign her
birth certificate, John openly and continuously recognized her as his child. She said that
she grew up in his ranch and that it was John who had financed her studies at John
Miller Primary School. She also said that John, in his holographic will, gave her 1/8 share
of his estate and, in a 1987 document, had assigned Betty to act as her guardian and her
inheritance administrator until she attains the age of majority. Joan also said that Betty
obtained an education plan for her upon John’s bidding.

The RTC and the CA ruled in favor of Joan and upheld her legitimacy and filiation as an
illegitimate child of John. Glenn, now substituted by his heirs, filed a Petition for Review
on Certiorari before the SC.

Issue: Can legitimacy and filiation be questioned only in a direct action seasonably filed
by the proper party, and not through collateral attack? Yes.

Held: The SC held that Glenn’s initiatory pleading before the RTC was a Petition for
Correction of Entries in Joan’s birth certificate. This is governed by Rule 108 of the Rules
of Court.

However, what petitioners seek is not a mere clerical change. It is not a simple matter of
correcting a single letter in Joan’s surname due to a misspelling. Rather, Joan’s filiation
will be gravely affected, as changing her surname from Miller to Espenida will also
change her status. This will affect not only her identity, but her successional rights as
well. Certainly, this change is substantial.

Following Braza v. The City Civil Registrar of Himamaylan City, Negros Occidental,
the SC emphasized that "legitimacy and filiation can be questioned only in a direct action
seasonably filed by the proper party, and not through collateral attack[.]" Moreover,
impugning the legitimacy of a child is governed by Article 171 of the Family Code, not
Rule 108 of the Rules of Court.

Doctrine: The legitimacy and filiation of children cannot be collaterally attacked in a

petition for correction of entries in the certificate of live birth.