Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 368 views

    Gonzales Vs Aguinaldo

    Uploaded by

    JaylordPataotao
    1) The case involves an intestate estate proceeding for Doña Ramona Gonzales Vda. De Favis. Beatriz F. Gonzales and Teresa Olbes were appointed co-administratices of the estate. 2) While Beatriz was in the United States, Teresa filed a motion to remove Beatriz as co-administratrix, claiming she was incapable. The judge removed Beatriz as co-administratrix. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Beatriz's removal was improper, as mere disagreements between co-administrators do not merit removal without misconduct. Beatriz's temporary absence from the country to care for her ill husband also did not disqualify her role as

    Copyright:

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

    Gonzales Vs Aguinaldo

    Uploaded by

    JaylordPataotao
    368 views2 pages
    1) The case involves an intestate estate proceeding for Doña Ramona Gonzales Vda. De Favis. Beatriz F. Gonzales and Teresa Olbes were appointed co-administratices of the estate. 2) While Beatriz was in the United States, Teresa filed a motion to remove Beatriz as co-administratrix, claiming she was incapable. The judge removed Beatriz as co-administratrix. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Beatriz's removal was improper, as mere disagreements between co-administrators do not merit removal without misconduct. Beatriz's temporary absence from the country to care for her ill husband also did not disqualify her role as

    Original Description:

    Gonzales vs Aguinaldo

    Original Title

    Gonzales vs Aguinaldo

    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 case involves an intestate estate proceeding for Doña Ramona Gonzales Vda. De Favis. Beatriz F. Gonzales and Teresa Olbes were appointed co-administratices of the estate. 2) While Beatriz was in the United States, Teresa filed a motion to remove Beatriz as co-administratrix, claiming she was incapable. The judge removed Beatriz as co-administratrix. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Beatriz's removal was improper, as mere disagreements between co-administrators do not merit removal without misconduct. Beatriz's temporary absence from the country to care for her ill husband also did not disqualify her role as

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    368 views2 pages

    Gonzales Vs Aguinaldo

    Uploaded by

    JaylordPataotao
    1) The case involves an intestate estate proceeding for Doña Ramona Gonzales Vda. De Favis. Beatriz F. Gonzales and Teresa Olbes were appointed co-administratices of the estate. 2) While Beatriz was in the United States, Teresa filed a motion to remove Beatriz as co-administratrix, claiming she was incapable. The judge removed Beatriz as co-administratrix. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Beatriz's removal was improper, as mere disagreements between co-administrators do not merit removal without misconduct. Beatriz's temporary absence from the country to care for her ill husband also did not disqualify her role as

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Letters testamentary and of administration – Grounds for removal of

    administrator or executor

    BEATRIZ F. GONZALES vs. HON. ZOILO AGUINALDO


    G.R. No. 74769, September 28, 1990

    FACTS:

    The Case involves an intestate proceeding involving the estate of the deceased
    Doña Ramona Gonzales Vda. De Favis. On 25 October 1983, the court a
    quo appointed petitioner Beatriz F. Gonzales and private respondent Teresa
    Olbes as co-administratices of the estate.

    On 11 November 1984, while petitioner Beatriz F. Gonzales was in the United


    States, Teresa Olbes filed a motion. To remove Beatriz F. Gonzales as co-
    administratrix, on the ground that she is incapable or unsuitable to discharge
    the trust and had committed acts and omissions detrimental to the interest of
    the estate and the heirs. Only one of the heirs opposed the removal since the
    petitioner is in the United States. 15 January 1985, respondent Judge cancelled
    the letters of administration granted to Beatriz F. Gonzales and retained Teresa
    Olbes as the administratrix of the estate
    Petitioner moved to reconsider, but the same was denied. Petitioner contends
    that the order should be nullified on the ground of grave abuse of discretion, as
    her removal was not shown by respondents to be anchored on any of the grounds
    provided under Section 2, Rule 82, of the Rules of Court.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not the removal of the petitioner as an administratrix was proper

    RULING:
    No, it was not proper
    In the appointment of the administrator of the estate of a deceased person, the
    principal consideration reckoned with is the interest in said estate of the one to
    be appointed as administrator. Hence, Section 2 of Rule 82 of the Rules of Court
    provides the legal and specific causes authorizing the court to remove an
    administrator.
    In the case, the lower court based the removal of the petitioner on the fact that
    in the administration of the estate, conflicts and misunderstandings have existed
    between petitioner and respondent Teresa Olbes which allegedly have prejudiced
    the estate. On this note the Court provided that mere disagreements between
    such joint fiduciaries, without misconduct, does not merit the removal of an
    administrator.

    Accordingly petitioner was removed co-administratrix of the estate on the ground


    that she had been absent from the country since October 1984 and had not
    returned as of 15 January 1985. Petitioner explained to the court that her
    absence from the country was due to the fact that she had to accompany her
    ailing husband to the United States for medical treatment. It appears too that
    petitioner's absence from the country was known to respondent Olbes, and that
    the latter and petitioner Gonzales had continually maintained correspondence
    with each other with respect to the administration of the estate during the
    petitioner's absence from the country.

    The Court held that the petitioner had never abandoned her role as co-
    administratrix of the estate nor had she been remiss in the fulfillment of her
    duties. Suffice it to state, temporary absence in the state does not disqualify one
    to be an administrator of the estate.

    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