Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 328 views

    Dizon-Rivera V Dizon

    Uploaded by

    r
    1) The testator, Agripina Valdez, left a will dividing her estate among her compulsory heirs and grandchildren. However, five of the compulsory heirs' shares were below their legitime. 2) The executrix proposed completing the legitimes of the underpaid heirs by taking cash and properties from the shares of two heirs who received more than their legitime. The opposing heirs proposed proportionally reducing all shares. 3) The court affirmed the executrix's plan, finding it properly completed the legitimes in accordance with the law and respected the testator's wishes, while the opponents' plan would have resulted in partial intestacy. It also approved paying cash to complete the legitimes as the

    Copyright:

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

    Dizon-Rivera V Dizon

    Uploaded by

    r
    328 views3 pages
    1) The testator, Agripina Valdez, left a will dividing her estate among her compulsory heirs and grandchildren. However, five of the compulsory heirs' shares were below their legitime. 2) The executrix proposed completing the legitimes of the underpaid heirs by taking cash and properties from the shares of two heirs who received more than their legitime. The opposing heirs proposed proportionally reducing all shares. 3) The court affirmed the executrix's plan, finding it properly completed the legitimes in accordance with the law and respected the testator's wishes, while the opponents' plan would have resulted in partial intestacy. It also approved paying cash to complete the legitimes as the

    Original Description:

    `

    Original Title

    1. Dizon-Rivera v Dizon

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The testator, Agripina Valdez, left a will dividing her estate among her compulsory heirs and grandchildren. However, five of the compulsory heirs' shares were below their legitime. 2) The executrix proposed completing the legitimes of the underpaid heirs by taking cash and properties from the shares of two heirs who received more than their legitime. The opposing heirs proposed proportionally reducing all shares. 3) The court affirmed the executrix's plan, finding it properly completed the legitimes in accordance with the law and respected the testator's wishes, while the opponents' plan would have resulted in partial intestacy. It also approved paying cash to complete the legitimes as the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    328 views3 pages

    Dizon-Rivera V Dizon

    Uploaded by

    r
    1) The testator, Agripina Valdez, left a will dividing her estate among her compulsory heirs and grandchildren. However, five of the compulsory heirs' shares were below their legitime. 2) The executrix proposed completing the legitimes of the underpaid heirs by taking cash and properties from the shares of two heirs who received more than their legitime. The opposing heirs proposed proportionally reducing all shares. 3) The court affirmed the executrix's plan, finding it properly completed the legitimes in accordance with the law and respected the testator's wishes, while the opponents' plan would have resulted in partial intestacy. It also approved paying cash to complete the legitimes as the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    DIZON-RIVERA v DIZON

    G.R. No. L-24561; 30 Jun 1970; TEEHANKEE, J.


    Digest by Miguel
    Ed Note: Yeah, the discussion on collation is just one short paragraph. This is
    primarily a partition case.
    I.

    Facts:

    Agripina Valdez, a widow, died on January 28, 1961, and was survived by seven
    compulsory heirs: six legitimate children-- Marina, who would be the executrixappellee, and her siblings, who would be the appellants, as well as Lilia, a
    grandchild representing a predeceased sibling (Ramon).
    Mrs. Valdez left a will, where the compulsory heirs and seven other legitimate
    grandchildren were bequeathed specific real properties totalling P1,811,695.60
    (appraised value at time of death). During the testate proceedings, the legitime of
    the compulsory heirs was pegged at P129,362.11 (1,811,695.60 / 2 = 905,847.8 / 7
    = 129,406.83). However, looking at the appraised values of the real properties
    devised, five of the compulsory heirs would receive an amount below their legitime
    (note that Tomas and Marina received P132k and P1.15m, respectively).
    To attempt to remedy this, both sides submitted their own projects of partition:
    - Marina, the executrix, admits that five of the compulsory heirs received less
    than the legitime. The plan is to adjudicate the properties given them in the
    will, plus cash and/or properties to complete their legitimes. These will be
    taken from the shares of Marina and Tomas, who received more than their
    legitime (especially Marina). The adjudications made in favor of the
    grandchildren will remain untouched.
    - The oppositors wanted to proportionally reduce all the testamentary
    dispositions such that they total 1/2 of the entire estate (such that they would
    all be taken out of the free portion). Their shares should consist of their
    legitime, plus the reduced value of their devises. These would be paid
    through the properties adjudicated to them (i.e. collation). As for the
    grandchildren, they would be adjudicated the properties devised to them
    subject to reimbursement due to the reduction of the devise.
    The lower court approved Marina's project of partition, citing Arts. 906-907 on
    completion of the legitime. The problem here is with respect to the source of the
    funds that would complete the impaired legitime-- here, it should be taken from
    Marina and Tomas (proportionate reduction). It would best follow the last wishes of
    the testatrix, and would prevent intestacy.
    Also note that it allowed adjustment through cash payment as it was a practical
    and valid solution in completing the legitime.
    II.

    Issues:
    a. Whether or not it the proper plan of action was to complete the
    legitime.

    b. Whether or not the dispositions were actually devises of real property


    such that they should be taken out of the free portion, and that they be
    given separately from the legitimes.
    c. Whether or not the properties are subject to collation under Arts. 10611063 NCC.
    d. Whether or not it was proper for the legitimes to be completed by
    paying cash.
    III.

    Held/Ratio: (Court affirmed LC judgment)


    a. Yes. Where a testator intends a partition through her will, the only
    limitation is Arts. 906-907 on completion and reduction.
    To start, the intention of the testator was for a partition through her will, which
    can be gleamed from her statement, "I command that my property be divided..."
    This is shown in how she designated real properties to her heirs. Under Art. 1080
    NCC, such a partition should be respected insofar as it does not prejudice the
    legitime of the compulsory heirs. In connection, Arts. 906-907 provide the
    safeguards to the legitime-- completion and reduction of testamentary dispositions.
    This was precisely what was done by the executrix. Should the oppositors' plan be
    approved, it would substantially result in intestacy (the Court didn't explain why),
    and would violate the right of the heirs to the exclusive ownership of the
    adjudicated property under Art. 1091 NCC.
    b. No. The wording of the will shows that the intent of the testator was to
    treat them as testamentary dispositions, not devises.
    Argument: The dispositions are devises of real property, citing the use of 'I
    bequeath...' and the distribution of real properties. Hence, these must be taken from
    the free portion.
    Court: The adjudications and assignments cannot be considered all devises, as it
    can be shown that the intent was to partition the entire state, for not only did the
    testatrix say that she intended to divide her property, but she said that whoever is
    named in the adjudications were considered heirs, not devisees. The fact that she
    used 'I bequeath' is trumped by this intent. Hence, the applicable rule is precisely
    the rule on completion and reduction.
    c. No. Collation does not apply when there were no previous donations to
    the compulsory heirs or where there are no properties left by will.
    Argument: Art. 1063 NCC is applicable. Authorities say that 'not deemed
    subject to collation' really means 'not imputable to or chargeable against the
    legitime'.
    Court: This is in applicable. The rules under Arts. 1061-1063 (on collation as
    imputation) are inapplicable in cases where there was no previous donations or
    where there were no properties left by will. More importantly, the amount of the
    legitime is already determined and undisputed.

    d. Whether or not it was proper for the legitimes to be completed by


    paying cash.
    Court: This is the only practical way to allow the legitimes to be completed
    while respecting the wishes of the testatrix to adjudicate real properties to her
    heirs. Any issues with the value of the lots must fall given that the reckoning of the
    value should be based on the time of death of the decedent-- if the Peso has
    weakened such that what they would have received now would be of far less value,
    it is due to their decision to appeal.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy