Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 141 views

    209-227 Espiritu Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Shimi Fortuna
    The court ruled that custody of the two children should be awarded to the father, not the mother, for three key reasons: 1) The daughter, Rosalind, showed a preference to stay with her father based on records submitted to the court. 2) The mother's conviction for bigamy and infidelity had already caused emotional disturbances for the daughter. 3) There was no evidence that the father was unfit, and he had been trying his best to care for the children, unlike the mother who left them.

    Copyright:

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

    209-227 Espiritu Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Shimi Fortuna
    141 views1 page
    The court ruled that custody of the two children should be awarded to the father, not the mother, for three key reasons: 1) The daughter, Rosalind, showed a preference to stay with her father based on records submitted to the court. 2) The mother's conviction for bigamy and infidelity had already caused emotional disturbances for the daughter. 3) There was no evidence that the father was unfit, and he had been trying his best to care for the children, unlike the mother who left them.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    209-227 Espiritu 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?

    The court ruled that custody of the two children should be awarded to the father, not the mother, for three key reasons: 1) The daughter, Rosalind, showed a preference to stay with her father based on records submitted to the court. 2) The mother's conviction for bigamy and infidelity had already caused emotional disturbances for the daughter. 3) There was no evidence that the father was unfit, and he had been trying his best to care for the children, unlike the mother who left them.

    Copyright:

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

    209-227 Espiritu Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Shimi Fortuna
    The court ruled that custody of the two children should be awarded to the father, not the mother, for three key reasons: 1) The daughter, Rosalind, showed a preference to stay with her father based on records submitted to the court. 2) The mother's conviction for bigamy and infidelity had already caused emotional disturbances for the daughter. 3) There was no evidence that the father was unfit, and he had been trying his best to care for the children, unlike the mother who left them.

    Copyright:

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

    the child to whom she preferred to stay must be

    REYNALDO ESPIRITU and GUILLERMA LAYUG, considered. It is evident in the records submitted that
    petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, TERESITA Rosalind chose to stay with his father/aunt. She was
    MASAUDING, respondents. found of suffering from emotional shock caused by
    her mother’s infidelity. Furthermore, there was
    FACTS: Reynaldo Espiritu and Teresita Masanding nothing in the records to show that Reynaldo is unfit
    began to maintain a common law relationship of well in fact he has been trying his best to give the
    husband while in US. Teresita works as a nurse while children the kind of attention and care which their
    Reynaldo was sent by his employer, National Steel mother is not in the position to extend. On the other
    Corporation, to Pittsburgh for a temporary post. They hand, the mother’s conviction for the crime of bigamy
    begot a child in 1986 named Rosalind. After a year, and her illicit relationship had already caused
    they went back to the Philippines for a brief vacation emotional disturbances and personality conflicts at
    when they also got married. Subsequently, they had least with the daughter.
    a second child named Reginald. In 1990, they decided
    to separate. Reynaldo pleaded for second chance but Hence, petition was granted. Custody of the minors
    instead of Teresita granting it, she left Reynaldo and was reinstated to their father.
    the children and went back to California. Reynaldo
    brought the children in the Philippines and left them
    with his sister. When Teresita returned in the
    Philippines sometime in 1992, she filed a petition for
    a writ of habeas corpus against Reynaldo and his
    sister to gain custody of the children.

    ISSUE: WON the custody of the 2 children should be


    awarded to the mother.

    RULING

    No.

    The task of choosing the parent to whom custody


    shall be awarded is not a ministerial function to be
    determined by a simple determination of the age of a
    minor child. Whether a child is under or over seven
    years of age, the paramount criterion must always be
    the child’s interests.

    In ascertaining the welfare and best interests of the


    child, courts are mandated by the Family Code to take
    into account all relevant considerations. If a child is
    under 7 years of age, the law presumes that the
    mother is the best custodian. The presumption is
    strong but it is not conclusive. It can be overcome by
    “compelling reasons.”

    Either parent, whether father or mother, is bound to


    suffer agony and pain if deprived of custody but it is
    not so much the suffering, pride, and other feelings of
    either parent but the welfare of the child which is the
    paramount consideration.

    At the time the judgment was rendered, the 2


    children were both over 7 years of age. The choice of

    You might also like