Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 96 views

    Teresita N. de Leon V. Hon. Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Hazel Barbarona
    Topic: Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons; Probate Court’s Power to Include or Exclude Properties are Provisional Doctrine: Probate court possess inherent power to determine what properties, rights and credits of the deceased should be included in or excluded from the inventory. Should an heir or person interested in the properties of a deceased person duly call the court’s attention to the fact that certain properties, rights or credits have been leftout in the inventory, it is likewise the court’s duty to hear the observations, with power to determine if such observations should be attended to or not and if the properties referred to therein belong prima facie to the intestate, but no such determination is final and ultimate in nature as to the ownership of the said properties. A probate court, whether in a testate or intestate proceeding, can only pass upon questions of title provisionally.

    Copyright:

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

    Teresita N. de Leon V. Hon. Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Hazel Barbarona
    96 views3 pages
    Topic: Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons; Probate Court’s Power to Include or Exclude Properties are Provisional Doctrine: Probate court possess inherent power to determine what properties, rights and credits of the deceased should be included in or excluded from the inventory. Should an heir or person interested in the properties of a deceased person duly call the court’s attention to the fact that certain properties, rights or credits have been leftout in the inventory, it is likewise the court’s duty to hear the observations, with power to determine if such observations should be attended to or not and if the properties referred to therein belong prima facie to the intestate, but no such determination is final and ultimate in nature as to the ownership of the said properties. A probate court, whether in a testate or intestate proceeding, can only pass upon questions of title provisionally.

    Original Title

    de leon vs ca

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Topic: Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons; Probate Court’s Power to Include or Exclude Properties are Provisional Doctrine: Probate court possess inherent power to determine what properties, rights and credits of the deceased should be included in or excluded from the inventory. Should an heir or person interested in the properties of a deceased person duly call the court’s attention to the fact that certain properties, rights or credits have been leftout in the inventory, it is likewise the court’s duty to hear the observations, with power to determine if such observations should be attended to or not and if the properties referred to therein belong prima facie to the intestate, but no such determination is final and ultimate in nature as to the ownership of the said properties. A probate court, whether in a testate or intestate proceeding, can only pass upon questions of title provisionally.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    96 views3 pages

    Teresita N. de Leon V. Hon. Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Hazel Barbarona
    Topic: Settlement of Estate of Deceased Persons; Probate Court’s Power to Include or Exclude Properties are Provisional Doctrine: Probate court possess inherent power to determine what properties, rights and credits of the deceased should be included in or excluded from the inventory. Should an heir or person interested in the properties of a deceased person duly call the court’s attention to the fact that certain properties, rights or credits have been leftout in the inventory, it is likewise the court’s duty to hear the observations, with power to determine if such observations should be attended to or not and if the properties referred to therein belong prima facie to the intestate, but no such determination is final and ultimate in nature as to the ownership of the said properties. A probate court, whether in a testate or intestate proceeding, can only pass upon questions of title provisionally.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    TERESITA N. DE LEON v.

    HON. COURT OF APPEALS,


    G.R. No. 128781
    August 6, 2002
    Topic: Settlement of Estate of Deceased
    Persons; Probate Court’s Power to Include
    or Exclude Properties are Provisional
    Doctrine: Probate court possess inherent
    power to determine what properties, rights
    and credits of the deceased should be
    included in or excluded from the inventory.
    Should an heir or person interested in the
    properties of a deceased person duly call the
    court’s attention to the fact that certain
    properties, rights or credits have been leftout in the inventory, it is likewise the court’s
    duty to hear the observations, with power
    to determine if such observations should be
    attended to or not and if the properties
    referred to therein belong prima facie to the
    intestate, but no such determination is final
    and ultimate in nature as to the ownership
    of the said properties. A probate court,
    whether in a testate or intestate proceeding,
    can only pass upon questions of title
    provisionally.
    Synopsis: Respondent filed a motion for
    collation on the ground that subject
    properties should be part of the inventory
    of properties in the estate of the deceased
    by gratuitous title which the probate court
    issued an order of collation on already
    registered properties in favor of the
    petitioners. A probate court has no
    authority to decide questions of the
    ownership of property, real or personal, but
    only the determination of whether such
    should be included in list of properties to be
    administered.
    Facts:
    Petitioner Teresita N. de Leon was
    appointed administratrix of the estate of
    Rafael C. Nicolas. Deceased spouses Rafael
    and Salud Nicolas were the parents of
    petitioner Teresita N. de Leon, Estrellita N.
    Vizconde, Antonio Nicolas (deceased
    husband of petitioner Zenaida Nicolas and
    predecessor of the petitioners Heirs of
    Antonio Nicolas), Ramon Nicolas and
    Roberto Nicolas. Private respondent Ramon
    G. Nicolas, filed a "Motion for Collation,"
    claiming that deceased Rafael Nicolas,
    during his lifetime, had given real properties
    to his children by gratuitous title and that
    administratrix-petitioner Teresita failed to
    include the same in the inventory of the
    estate of the decedent.
    RTC then issued an Order directing
    Ramon to submit pertinent documents
    relative to the transfer of the properties
    from the registered owners during their
    lifetime for proper determination of the
    court. An order of collation was issued
    which included the properties of petitioner
    de Leon. Petitioner filed a Motion for
    Reconsideration alleging that the properties
    subject of the Order was already titled in
    their names years ago but the RTC denied
    said motion, ruling that it is within the
    jurisdiction of the court to determine
    whether titled properties should be collated.
    The case was then elevated to the CA which
    upheld the ruling of the RTC on the ground
    that the decision had already become final
    for failure of petitioners to appeal within
    the required period.
    Issue:
    Whether the RTC, acting as probate
    court can pass upon questions of title or
    ownership in the intestate proceedings?
    Ruling:
    No, a probate court has no authority
    to decide questions of the ownership of
    property, real or personal. Probate court
    could only determine whether they should
    or should not be included in the inventory
    or list of properties to be administered by
    the administrator. If there is a dispute as to
    the ownership, then the opposing parties
    and the administrator have to resort to an
    ordinary action for a final determination of
    the conflicting claims of title because the
    probate court cannot do so. CA likewise
    committed an error in considering the order
    of the court as final or binding upon the
    heirs or third persons who dispute the
    inclusion of certain properties. Said order isnot a collation order but merely an order
    including the subject properties in the
    inventory of the estate of decedent. The
    determination by the RTC is not conclusive
    and is subject to final decision in a separate
    action for final determination of the
    conflicting claims of title.

    You might also like