Perez - v - Perez
[G.R. No. L-12359. July
15, 1959.] (In the Matter
of the Petition for the Summary Settlement of the Estate left by the deceased
Caridad Perez. BERNANDINO PEREZ, Petitioner-Appellee, v. CONRADA
PEREZ, ET AL., Oppositors-Appellants. BENGZON, J.)
Facts:
1. The case involves the summary
settlement of a testate estate worth P6,000.00 according to petitioner, or
P10,000.00 according to oppositors from the Iloilo Court of First Instance
2. Oppositors-appellants insist
the lower court did not "acquire jurisdiction to receive the evidence for
the allowance of the alleged will" because two heirs (Melanio Perez, Jr.
and Milagros Perez) had not been notifies in advance of the hearing for the
allowance of such will.
3. Petitioner-appellee says the
persons mentioned were not entitled to notice, since they were not forced heirs
— grandnephew and niece — and had not been mentioned as legatees or devisees in
the will of the deceased.
4. And as to Milagros Perez,
petitioner asserts that notice had been addressed to her last known residence
in this country.
Ruling:
-
The court acquires jurisdiction over all persons interested in the
estate through the publication of the petition in the newspapers — which in
this case admittedly took place.
-
Service of notice on individual heirs or legatees or devisees is a
matter of procedural convenience, not jurisdiction requisite. Even if the names
of some legatees or heirs had been omitted from the petition for allowance of
the will and therefore were not adviced — the decree allowing the will does not
ipso facto become void for want of jurisdiction
-
The result is that the matter of "jurisdiction" discussed by
oppositors appears to be so unsubstantial as to furnish no reason to bypass the
Court of Appeals authority to appraise the factual issues in the litigation.
-
Needless, to add, in fine, the jurisdictional question directly
appealable to this Court refers to jurisdiction over the subject matter, not
mere jurisdiction over the person.
Referred to the Court of Appeals for disposition in
accordance with law.
Note: I made this case digest when I was still a law student. The ones posted on my blog were not due for submission as part of any academic requirement. I want to remind you that there is no substitute to reading the full text of the case! Use at your own risk.
Note: I made this case digest when I was still a law student. The ones posted on my blog were not due for submission as part of any academic requirement. I want to remind you that there is no substitute to reading the full text of the case! Use at your own risk.
