Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 304 views

    Santos V Aranzanso Digest

    Uploaded by

    Kyla Ellen Calelao
    This case involved a petition to settle an intestate estate. The deceased's cousins challenged the adoption of two minors that had been granted years prior in the adoption proceedings. The Supreme Court ruled that the adoption decree could not be collaterally attacked in the estate settlement proceeding. First, parental consent is not required if abandonment is found, which the adoption court determined was the case. Second, the determination of facts by an inferior tribunal cannot be questioned in a collateral attack. Therefore, the appellate court erred in reviewing the adoption court's finding of abandonment in the collateral attack on the estate proceeding.

    Copyright:

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

    Santos V Aranzanso Digest

    Uploaded by

    Kyla Ellen Calelao
    304 views2 pages
    This case involved a petition to settle an intestate estate. The deceased's cousins challenged the adoption of two minors that had been granted years prior in the adoption proceedings. The Supreme Court ruled that the adoption decree could not be collaterally attacked in the estate settlement proceeding. First, parental consent is not required if abandonment is found, which the adoption court determined was the case. Second, the determination of facts by an inferior tribunal cannot be questioned in a collateral attack. Therefore, the appellate court erred in reviewing the adoption court's finding of abandonment in the collateral attack on the estate proceeding.

    Original Title

    183140271-Santos-v-Aranzanso-digest.doc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved a petition to settle an intestate estate. The deceased's cousins challenged the adoption of two minors that had been granted years prior in the adoption proceedings. The Supreme Court ruled that the adoption decree could not be collaterally attacked in the estate settlement proceeding. First, parental consent is not required if abandonment is found, which the adoption court determined was the case. Second, the determination of facts by an inferior tribunal cannot be questioned in a collateral attack. Therefore, the appellate court erred in reviewing the adoption court's finding of abandonment in the collateral attack on the estate proceeding.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    304 views2 pages

    Santos V Aranzanso Digest

    Uploaded by

    Kyla Ellen Calelao
    This case involved a petition to settle an intestate estate. The deceased's cousins challenged the adoption of two minors that had been granted years prior in the adoption proceedings. The Supreme Court ruled that the adoption decree could not be collaterally attacked in the estate settlement proceeding. First, parental consent is not required if abandonment is found, which the adoption court determined was the case. Second, the determination of facts by an inferior tribunal cannot be questioned in a collateral attack. Therefore, the appellate court erred in reviewing the adoption court's finding of abandonment in the collateral attack on the estate proceeding.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    SANTOS v.

    ARANZANSO

    Parties:

    PAULINA SANTOS and AURORA SANTOS, petitioners,


    GREGORIA ARANZANSO and DEMETRIA VENTURA, respondents.

    FACTS:

    1) A petition for adoption of Paulina, 17 years old and Aurora Santos, 8 years old, was filed by Simplicio Santos and
    Juliana Reyes in the CFI of Manila.
    2) It was alleged that both parents of the minors have long been unheard from and could not be found in spite of
    diligent efforts to locate them; that since the war said minors have been abandoned; and that for years since their
    infancy, said children have been continuously been in petitioners’ care and custody.

    3) The consent to the adoption has been given by the guardian ad litem appointed by the Court.

    4) After due publication and hearing, the adoption court granted the petition for the adoption.

    5) Subsequently – eight years later – Juliana Reyes died intestate.

    6) Simplicio Santos filed a petition for the settlement of the intestate estate of the former, stating among other
    things that the surviving heirs of the deceased are: he, Paulina Santos and Aurora Santos.

    7) He also asked that he be appointed administrator of the estate.

    8) Gregoria Aranzanso, alleging to be the first cousin of the deceased, filed an opposition to the petition for
    appointment of administrator, asserting among others that the adoption of Paulina and Aurora Santos is void ab
    initio for want of the written consent of their parents, who were then living and had not abandoned them.

    9) Demetria Ventura, alleging likewise to be the first cousin of the deceased and mother of Paulina opposed also the
    petition of Simplicio and adopted the pleadings filed by Aranzanso.

    10) The Court of Appeals sustained respondent-oppositors right to make a collateral attack against the adoption
    decree on the ground of failure to obtain the consent of the natural parents was a jurisdictional defect rendering
    the adoption void ab initio.

    ISSUE: Whether a decree of adoption could be assailed collaterally in a settlement proceeding.

    RULING: NO. Firstly, consent of the parents is not an absolute requisite if child was abandoned, consent by the guardian
    ad litem suffices.

    Second, in adoption proceedings, abandonment imports “any conduct on the part of the parent which evinces a settled
    purpose to forgo all parental duties and relinquish all parental claims to the child.” It means neglect or refusal to perform
    the natural and legal obligations of care and support which parents owe to their children.”

    Third, the settled rule is that even when the jurisdiction of an inferior tribunal depends upon the existence of a fact to be
    established before it, the determination of that fact by the tribunal cannot be questioned in a collateral attack upon its
    order. Hence, the CA erred in reviewing under a collateral attack, the determination of the adoption court that the
    parents of the adopted children had abandoned them.

    Wherefore, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is hereby reversed and the order of the probate court a quo sustaining
    the adoption, dated April 6, 1959, is affirmed. Respondents Gregoria Aranzanso and Demetria Ventura as well as Consuelo
    and Pacita Pasion are declared without right to intervene as heirs in the settlement of the intestate estate of Juliana
    Reyes. The preliminary injunction heretofore issued is dissolved, except insofar as it enjoins the intervention or allowance
    of withdrawals of properly from the estate by Gregoria Aranzanso, Demetria Ventura, Consuelo and Pacita Pasion, in the
    concept of heirs, as to which it is hereby made permanent. No costs. So ordered.

    You might also like