Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    3 - Aznar v. Duncan Digest

    Uploaded by

    Rea Jane B. Malcampo
    This case involved the estate of Edward E. Christensen, who died leaving a will. Maria Helen Christensen Garcia was judicially declared as Christensen's natural child after his death. Lucy Duncan was expressly recognized as Christensen's natural daughter in his will. The issue was whether there was preterition of Garcia, which would annul the institution of heirs. The Supreme Court ruled there was no preterition because 1) Christensen did not entirely omit Garcia but left her a legacy, and 2) the testator's wishes as expressed in the will should be followed. Therefore, Garcia was entitled to her legitime share of 1/4 of the estate, but the institution of heirs was not annulled.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    3 - Aznar v. Duncan Digest

    Uploaded by

    Rea Jane B. Malcampo
    2K views1 page
    This case involved the estate of Edward E. Christensen, who died leaving a will. Maria Helen Christensen Garcia was judicially declared as Christensen's natural child after his death. Lucy Duncan was expressly recognized as Christensen's natural daughter in his will. The issue was whether there was preterition of Garcia, which would annul the institution of heirs. The Supreme Court ruled there was no preterition because 1) Christensen did not entirely omit Garcia but left her a legacy, and 2) the testator's wishes as expressed in the will should be followed. Therefore, Garcia was entitled to her legitime share of 1/4 of the estate, but the institution of heirs was not annulled.

    Original Description:

    Succession case digest - preterition

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved the estate of Edward E. Christensen, who died leaving a will. Maria Helen Christensen Garcia was judicially declared as Christensen's natural child after his death. Lucy Duncan was expressly recognized as Christensen's natural daughter in his will. The issue was whether there was preterition of Garcia, which would annul the institution of heirs. The Supreme Court ruled there was no preterition because 1) Christensen did not entirely omit Garcia but left her a legacy, and 2) the testator's wishes as expressed in the will should be followed. Therefore, Garcia was entitled to her legitime share of 1/4 of the estate, but the institution of heirs was not annulled.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views1 page

    3 - Aznar v. Duncan Digest

    Uploaded by

    Rea Jane B. Malcampo
    This case involved the estate of Edward E. Christensen, who died leaving a will. Maria Helen Christensen Garcia was judicially declared as Christensen's natural child after his death. Lucy Duncan was expressly recognized as Christensen's natural daughter in his will. The issue was whether there was preterition of Garcia, which would annul the institution of heirs. The Supreme Court ruled there was no preterition because 1) Christensen did not entirely omit Garcia but left her a legacy, and 2) the testator's wishes as expressed in the will should be followed. Therefore, Garcia was entitled to her legitime share of 1/4 of the estate, but the institution of heirs was not annulled.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Aznar v.

    Duncan
    G.R. No. L-24365
    June 30, 1966

    Facts:
    Edward E. Christensen, a citizen of California with domicile in the Philippines, died leaving a will
    executed on March 5, 1951. (In 1954) The will was admitted to probate by the CFI and it also declared that
    Maria Helen Christensen Garcia was a natural child of the deceased. The decision was appealed to the SC
    and was affirmed.
    (In 1963) In another incident relative to the partition of the deceaseds estate, the RTC approved
    the project submitted by the executor in accordance with the provisions of the will, which said court found to
    be valid under the law of California. Helen Garcia appealed from the order of approval and the SC reversed
    the ruling on the ground that the validity of the provisions of the will should be governed by Philippine law.
    SC returned the case to the lower court with instructions that the partition be made as provided by said law.
    (In 1964) CFI issued an order approving the project of partition submitted by the executor wherein
    the properties of the estate were divided equally between Maria Lucy Duncan, whom the testator had
    expressly recognized in his will as his natural daughter and Helen Garcia, who had been judicially declared
    as such after his death.
    Lucy Duncan appealed with the sole question of whether the estate, after deducting the legacies,
    should pertain to her and to Helen Garcia in equal shares or whether the inheritance of Lucy Duncan as
    instituted heir should merely reduced to the extent necessary to cover the legitime of Helen Garcia,
    equivalent to of the entire estate.
    RTC ruled and appellee now maintains that there has been preterition of Helen Garcia, a
    compulsory heir in the direct line, resulting in the annulment of the institution of heir pursuant to Article 854
    of the CC. Appellant contends that Helen Garcia is entitled only to her legitime, and not to a share of the
    estate equal that of Lucy Duncan as if the succession were instestate.
    In the will of the deceased, Helen Garcia was given a legacy of P3,600.00.

    Issue:
    Whether or not there was preterition.
    Ruling:
    No, there was no preterition. The solution (from three SC Spain decisions cited by Manresa) was
    that the heir ask that the legitime be completed and not that the institution of heirs be annulled entirely. This
    solution is more in consonance with the expressed wishes of the testator in the present case as may be
    gathered very clearly from the provisions of his will. He refused to acknowledge Helen Garcia as his natural
    daughter, and limited her share to a legacy of P3,600.00. The fact that she was subsequently declared
    judicially to possess such status is no reason to assume that had the judicial declaration come during his
    lifetime his subjective attitude towards here would have undergone any change and that he would have
    willed his estate equally to her and to Lucy Duncan, who alone was expressly recognized by him.

    The testator did not entirely omit Helen Garcia but left her a legacy of P3,600.00.

    Therefore, of the estate of the deceased which consisted of 399 shares of stocks and a certain
    amount of cash descended to Helen Garcia as her legitime. Since she became the owner of her share as of
    the moment of the death of the decedent, she is entitled to a corresponding portion of all the fruits or
    increments thereof subsequently accruing.

    Therefore, there is no preterition if the heir is given a legacy or devise.


    Rea Jane B. Malcampo

    You might also like