View full case

MILAGROS A. CORTES v. CA

FACTS:

The case involves a petition for review on certiorari seeking a reversal of the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals set aside the order of the probate court and declared it null and void. The undisputed facts are as follows: Menandro Reselva, Milagros Cortes, and Florante Reselva are siblings and the heirs of the late spouses Teodoro Reselva and Lucrecia Aguirre Reselva. Teodoro executed a holographic will which was later probated. Milagros, the appointed executrix, filed a motion before the probate court to order Menandro to vacate the property owned by the estate and turn over possession to her. The respondent probate court granted the motion. However, the Court of Appeals set aside the order of the probate court, stating that probate courts have no jurisdiction over claims for title or right of possession of properties claimed to be part of the estate. However, Menandro is not considered an "outside party" as he is one of the compulsory heirs and therefore involved in the settlement of the estate. The case falls under an exception to the general rule, wherein the probate court is competent to decide the question of ownership when the parties are all heirs of the decedent. Furthermore, the case falls under Rule 73, Section 2 of the Revised Rules of Court, which provides for the liquidation of the conjugal partnership in the testate or intestate proceedings of the deceased spouse. Thus, the case is remanded to the probate court for further proceedings.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the probate court has jurisdiction to adjudicate the question of ownership and possession of the property claimed to be part of the estate.

  2. Whether Menandro A. Reselva, as one of the heirs, can be considered an "outside party" in the settlement of the estate.

  3. Whether the case falls under Rule 73, Section 2 of the Revised Rules of Court, allowing the liquidation of the conjugal partnership in the testate or intestate proceedings of either deceased spouse.

RULING:

  1. The probate court has jurisdiction to decide the issue of ownership and possession of the property claimed to be part of the estate, as long as all the parties involved are heirs of the decedent.

  2. Menandro A. Reselva, being one of the compulsory heirs, cannot be considered an "outside party" in the settlement of the estate.

  3. The case falls under Rule 73, Section 2 of the Revised Rules of Court, which allows for the liquidation of the conjugal partnership in the testate or intestate proceedings of either deceased spouse.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Probate courts cannot adjudicate or determine title to properties claimed to be part of the estate and which are claimed to belong to outside parties.

  • When the parties involved in a probate case are all heirs of the decedent, they have the option to submit to the probate court the question of ownership.

  • Claims of heirs that are not adverse to or in conflict with that of the decedent can be properly decided by the probate court.

  • When the controversy is whether the property belongs to the conjugal partnership or exclusively to the decedent, it is within the jurisdiction of the probate court to decide.

  • Rule 73, Section 2 of the Revised Rules of Court allows for the liquidation of the conjugal partnership in the testate or intestate proceedings of either deceased spouse.