Basic Succession Law Quiz No. 1 – February 10, 2024 Instructions: a. Submit your answers in pdf and email to arcasino@gmail.com b. Write legibly and observe proper grammar. Incorrect usage of the language will merit a failing mark. c. Answer in CLAC Method if the question requires it. Non-responsive answers will get zero mark. Your opinion is considered an unacceptable answer. d. This quiz is equivalent to three recitations. Quiz Score will form part of your recitations. e. The quiz is for one hour only. NO EXTENSIONS. 1. Before his death, Anna borrowed Php 2, 000,000.00 from Beth and executed a promissory note. Subsequently, A died with the obligation still outstanding and left no property but is survived by her daughter Maria. Maria is a successful jeweler and eventually, Beth instituted an action for collection of the Php 2.0M from Maria on the ground that she is the only heir of Anna contending that Maria inherited properties from Anna, but also her rights and obligations. Will the action prosper? (5pts) 2. Olga and Tomas have been married since 1952 and they begot two children: Jose and Andrea. Andrea went on to become a doctor and was able to set up her clinic in the US. Jose, on the other hand, married Sofia and stayed in the Philippines and built his own poultry farm. In one of the farmlands owned by Olga and Tomas, Jose utilized the same as his own poultry farm. After five years operating the business, Olga had a huge quarrel with Jose’s wife, Sofia and as a result, told them to pay the rental on the farm lot where the poultry stands or vacate the premises. Jose and Sofia ignored Olga’s demands even if Tomas has already intervened. As a result, Olga filed an ejectment suit against Jose and Sofia who argued in defense that the farm lots were already his share of inheritance from Tomas. As a matter of fact, the titles are already being processed but Olga and Tomas have not yet turned over the Mother Title, so it is still pending with the DENR. As the MTC Judge, would you grant the action for ejectment filed by Olga and Tomas? 3. Sps. Gloria and Epenito owned several land holdings in Bulacan, Cebu and Cagayan de Oro. Epenito died in 1986. They have Three Children- Victoria, Solita and Emmanuel and Twelve Grandchildren including Vanessa and Voltaire, who survived their father Emmanuel who died in early 1990s from an accident. Victoria eventually died in 2007 and she is survived by her children Hana, Jihan, Aizza and Marian (Saab Siblings). Solita has a daughter Katrina and is now based in Cebu. Gloria died in 2020 during the Covid pandemic and in 2021, Solita submitted her will to probate. This was opposed by the children of Victoria (the Saab Siblings) as they contend that Gloria consistently held in her lifetime that she did not execute a will and that she would divide her estate equally between her three children Victoria, Solita and Emmanuel. Further, they contend that first, the will’s attestation did not contain the number of witnesses to the will; second, the will was written and made in Bisaya, when Gloria was conversant in English, a little Bisaya and Chinese; third, that Gloria during the last years of her life was already unable to walk on her own, and more so travel to Cagayan de Oro to have her will made. And lastly, they allege that Gloria’s signature was a forgery for the same is crooked not straight, as appearing in Gloria’s passport. Solita, on the other hand, presented the will duly notarized by Lee, Legaspi and partners law firm by Atty. Lee who is based in Cagayan de Oro. She argued that the will is genuine and in fact witnessed by the three other partners of Atty Lee: Atty Legaspi, Atty Enriquez and Atty Palen. When the lawyers prepared the will, Gloria was asked several questions to prove that she was still of sound mind and knew and understood the contents of her will. The Saab siblings reiterate their argument that it is highly impossible for their grandmother Gloria to leave a majority of the estate to Solita when she was already frail and of unsound mind. However, they admitted that Gloria spent her time flying from Canada to Manila and Cagayan de Oro before her death during the pandemic. If you were the probate court, will you admit the will? 4. Manuel died in 2020 and was survived by his sons Jose, Pedro and Juan. In 2015, Manuel sold his commercial building to his kumpare Antonio but the latter was not able to transfer the title since he was based in the US. He transferred 500K USD to Manuel in 2015 when he came home and signed but unnotarized Deed of Sale. When he learned of Manuel’s death in 2020, he flew home and proceeded with the transfer of the property to his name. The Children of Manuel opposed the same arguing that since this sale is unregistered, it must be converted as a claim of monetary obligation which must be filed in the intestate proceedings instituted on the estate of Manuel. Would you sustain this argument? 5. Estrella died without a will in 2017 leaving a vast property in Iligan City including the property which St. John School stood. Estrella brother Saturnino was the coadministrator of Estrella’s estate and filed a motion for the amount of Php 40.0 M Savings Account with PSBANK Velez under the name of St. John School be levied and attached. He claims that the amount thereon are payment rentals of St. John School which have failed to pay rent for a number of years to Estrella. According to Saturnino, St. John School held these funds as a mere trustee as it is the estate of Estrella who is the rightful owner. In fact, St. John school did not declare the deposit as part of its income/assets with BIR. St. John School filed a comment arguing that first, they did not receive Saturnino’s motion, and second, there was no lease contract executed between Estrella and St. John. In 2018, the RTC Cagayan de Oro issued a Freeze order ruling that there is prima facie evidence showing that the funds in St. John School account belonged to Estrella. St. John filed a Complaint in Intervention, but the same was denied by the RTC. Aggrieved, St. John filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the CA arguing that the RTC acted with grave abuse of discretion when it ruled on the issue of the fund’s ownership despite its limited jurisdiction over intestate proceedings. If you were the CA Justice, how will you rule on the Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by St. John?
