Locsin Vs CA

Locsin vs CA
Facts:
The late Getulio Locsin had three children
named Mariano, Julian and Magdalena. After his
death, his estate was divided among his three
(3) children where more than (40) hectares of
coconut lands in Bogtong, (18) hectares of
riceland in Daraga, and the residential lots in
Daraga, Albay and in Legazpi City went to his
son Mariano, which Mariano brought into his
marriage to Catalina Jaucian in 1908. Catalina,
for her part, brought into the marriage untitled
properties which she had inherited from her
parents.
Mariano Locsin executed a Last Will and
Testament instituting his wife, Catalina, as the
sole and universal heir of all his properties. The
will was drawn up by his wife's nephew and
trusted legal adviser, Atty Salvador Lorayes.
Attyy Lorayes disclosed that the spouses being
childless, they had agreed that their properties,
after both of them shall have died should
revert to their respective sides of the family,
i.e., Mariano's properties would go to his
"Locsin relatives" and those of Catalina to her
"Jaucian relatives."
Don Mariano Locsin died of cancer and As
directed in his will, Catalina was appointed
executrix of his estate. Her lawyer in the
probate proceeding was Atty Lorayes.
Catalina began transferring, by sale, donation
or assignment, Don Mariano's as well as her
own, properties to their respective nephews
and nieces. Properties originally owned by
Mariano Locsin were transferred to Locsin
relatives, thr petitioners and Catalinas
properties to her relatives.
Four years before her death, she had made a
will affirming and ratifying the transfers she
had made during her lifetime in favor of her
husband's, and her own, relatives.
Six (6) years after Doa Catalina's demise,
some of her Jaucian nephews and nieces who
had already received their hereditary shares
from her estate, filed an action before RTC to
recover the properties which she had conveyed
to the Locsins during her lifetime, alleging that
the conveyances were inofficious, without
consideration,
and
intended
solely
circumvent the laws on succession.
to
RTC and CA ruled in favour of Jaucians

Issue:
WON Jaucians are entitled to inherit the
properties already disposed by Catalina?
Held:
No. Those properties which Catalina already
disposed of more than ten (10) years before
her death do not form part of her hereditary
estate as the latter includes "the property and
transmissible rights and obligations existing at
the time of (the decedent's) death and those
which have accrued thereto since the opening
of the succession." Had she died intestate, only
the property that remained in her estate at the
time of her death devolved to her legal heirs.
The rights to a person's succession are
transmitted from the moment of his death, and
do not vest in his heirs until such time.
There is thus no basis for assuming an
intention on the part of Doa Catalina, in
transferring the properties she had received
from her late husband to his nephews and
nieces, an intent to circumvent the law in
violation of the private respondents' rights to
her succession. Said respondents are not her
compulsory heirs, and it is not pretended that
she had any such, hence there were no
legitimes that could conceivably be impaired
by any transfer of her property during her
lifetime.
The lower court capitalized on the fact that
Doa Catalina was already 90 years old when
she died and it insinuated that bec of her
advanced years she may have been unduly
influenced and morally pressured by her
husband's nephews and nieces (petitioners) to
transfer to them the properties which she had
inherited from Don Mariano's estate. The
records do not support that conjecture.There is
not the slightest suggestion in the record that
Doa Catalina was mentally incompetent when
she made those dispositions. Indeed, how can
any such suggestion be made in light of the
fact that even as she was transferring
properties to the Locsins, she was also
contemporaneously disposing of
properties in favor of the Jaucians?
her
other
This Court finds no reason to disbelieve

Attorney Lorayes' testimony that before Don
Mariano died, he and his wife (Doa Catalina),
being childless, had agreed that their
respective properties should eventually revert

to their respective lineal relatives

Locsin Vs CA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Locsin Vs CA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Locsin Vs CA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Locsin vs CA

RTC and CA ruled in favour of Jaucians

This Court finds no reason to disbelieve

respective properties should eventually revert

You might also like

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