Duty to account charges and expenses of administrator  The petitioner filed an Amended Inventory in

improper charges compliance with the said order. However, the

G.R. No. L-24584 October 30, 1975 petitioner-administratrix did not comply with the
portion of said order which required her to deposit
ILUMINADA DE GALA-SISON, As Administratrix of the remainder of the amount of P40,938.56 which
the Intestate Estate of the late Generoso de Gala,
may be in her possession.
petitioner,
 Instead, she filed a manifestation stating that "there
vs. is really no necessity for any deposit to be made
HON. MANOLO L. MADDELA, as Judge of the Court of
with a banking institution which the probate court
First Instance of Quezon and SOCORRO MANALO, then believed was necessary way back on August 29,
respondents. 1952 when the accountable fund was still a sizable
one," since from the remainder of said amount of
Doctrine P40,938.56 ordered to be deposited, several
 A judicial administrator is entitled, by way of deductions should be made consisting of additional
compensation as such, to either (a) P4.00 per day "for expenses, advances and allowances, expenses of
the time actually and necessarily employed" by him as litigation and attorney’s office, and compensation
such administrator, or (b) a "commission upon the value of petitioner administratrix.
of so much of the estate as comes into his possession and  An examination of the records reveals that from the
was finally disposed of by him" according to the amount of P40,935.56, only the sum of P1,698.41
schedule therein provided. must be deducted. Hence petitioner was required to
FACTS deposit the amount of P39,240.15.
 The petitioner then filed a motion for new trial
 In relation to a current special proceeding (namely and/or reconsideration of the order alleging,
SP no. 2887), the CFI of Quezon City issued 2 among others, that the lower court erred in holding
orders first is require petitioner-administratrix to that the disbursements itemized in her verified
deposit the amount of P40, 938.56in her possession accounting are unsupported by receipts and that
with a reputable banking institution and 2nd to her payments of attorney's fees were for her benefit
include in her inventory of properties left by the as heir; and praying that said order of May 10, 1965,
deceased certain pieces of jewelry described in be set aside and reconsidered.
Exhibit "Y" of herein private respondent.
ISSUE and has required a high degree of capacity on the
part of the executor or administrator".
WHETHER THE CONTENTION OF PETITIONER
AS TO THE DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS BE GIVEN
 In order to entitle the executor or
CREDENCE
administrator to additional compensation,
HELD – NO the estate must be large, the settlement
extraordinarily difficult, and a high degree
RATIO:
of capacity demonstrated by him.
 The matters relating to the advances to her as heir,  It must be noted that petitioner is seeking as her
her compensation as administratrix and her other compensation as administratrix an amount greater
disbursements cannot be considered separately than that ordinarily allowed under the rules on the
from the order to deposit the amount of P39,240.15, ground that the estate is large, its settlement
 As the respondent court observed: "It is ... very "having been attended with great and required a
obvious that should said petitions be granted, she high degree of capacity".
shall be relieved thereby of her obligation to deposit  The amount of his fee in special cases under the
the amount of P39,314.15 as ordered by this Court." Rules is a matter largely in the discretion of the
 Pursuant to Section 7 of Rule 85 of the Rules, 3 a probate court, which will not be disturbed on
judicial administrator is entitled, by way of appeal, except for an abuse of discretion
compensation as such, to either (a) P4.00
per day "for the time actually and
necessarily employed" by him as such
administrator, or (b) a "commission upon
the value of so much of the estate as comes
into his possession and was finally disposed
of by him" according to the schedule therein
provided.
 The administrator may be allowed a greater
or additional sum
"where the estate is large, and the
settlement has been attended with great difficulty,
Rule 85 presented that has not already delivered all the
properties and dividends of the shares of stock
TUMANG v. LAGUIO
adjudicated to her and her minor children since
FACTS the approval of the original and amendatory
projects of partition; and iii) that with such
 In Special Proceeding No. 1953 involving the admission, the court no longer has jurisdiction to
estate of the late Dominador Tumang pending entertain the motion under consideration.
before Pampanga CFI, the widow of the deceased,  Appellants filed a motion to require appellee to
Magdalena A. Tumang, administratrix and render an accounting. The CFI denied the motion.
executrix of the will, filed a petition to declare the A motion for reconsideration was filed, but it was
testate proceedings terminated and closed with also denied because, according to the trial court,
respect to herself and two of her children — Melba when appellants initially received their share of
Tumang Ticzon and Nestor A. Tumang. She did so cash dividends without requiring the
because the aforesaid heirs had already administratrix to render an account already
acknowledged receipt of the properties constitutes a waiver on their part to question such
adjudicated to them, and in order for such correctness of the aforesaid cash dividends.
properties to be transferred in their names, there
was need for an order of the court declaring the ISSUES
proceedings closed with respect to the heirs.
1. Whether the court should have required the
 The petition was opposed by appellee's daughter, executrix to render an accounting of the cash
Guia T. Laguio and her children on the ground and stock dividends received after the approval
that appellee, as administratrix and executrix, had of her final accounts - YES
not yet delivered all properties adjudicated to
them. Moreover, the oppositors contended that 2. Whether petitioners have waived their right to
there could be no partial termination of the demand such accounting - NO
proceedings.
 Thereafter, the administratrix withdrew the
herpetition. During the hearing of the motion to RATIO
withdraw petition, appellee presented documents 1. Section 8 of Rule 85 provides that the
showing that the estate and inheritance i) taxes "executor or administrator shall render an account of his
had been fully paid; ii) that as certified by the administration within one (1) year from the time of
Deputy Clerk of Court, no claim has been
receiving letters testamentary or of administration . . ., and office. An executor should account for all his receipts and
he shall render such further accounts as the court may disbursements since his last accounting.
require until the estate is wholly settled."
2. Appellants, by receiving the dividends
In the instant case, further accounts by the without requiring an accounting, did not waive their right
executrix appear to be in order, in view of the fact that the to do so. The duty of an executor or administrator to
dividends sought to be accounted for are not included in render an account is not a mere incident of an
the final accounts rendered by the executrix. It appears administration proceeding which can be waived or
that the interests of all the parties will be better served and disregarded. It is a duty that has to be performed and duly
the conflict between petitioners and respondent will be acted upon by the court before the administration is finally
resolved if such additional accounting is made. Further, "it ordered closed and terminated, to the end that no part of
has been held that an executor or administrator who the decedent's estate be left unaccounted for. The fact that
receives assets of the estate after he has filed an account the final accounts had been approved does not divest the
should file a supplementary account thereof, and may be court of jurisdiction to require supplemental accounting
compelled to do so, but that it is only with respect to for, aside from the initial accounting, the Rules provide
matters occurring after the settlement of final account that that he shall render such further accounts as the court
representatives will be compelled to file supplementary may require until the estate is wholly settled.
account."
PETITION GRANTED, RTC’S ORDERS
It is only in a case where the petition to compel an REVERSED.
executor to account after he has accounted and has been
discharged fails to allege that any further sums came into
the hands of the executor, and the executor specifically
denies the receipt of any further sums that the accounting
should be denied.
There is no question that in the instant case, the fact
that the executrix received funds of the estate after the
approval of her final accounts and before the issuance of
an order finally closing the proceedings is admitted. She
must, therefore, account for the same, in consonance with
her duty to account for all the assets of the decedent's
estate which have come into her possession by virtue of her
Rule 85 Respondent, as the only remaining claimant against
the intestate estate, filed its Comment on/Opposition
QUASHA LAW OFFICE v. LCN CONSTRUCTION
to the Motion.
GROUP
 In an order, the RTC declared that there was no more
FACTS need for accounting of the assets and liabilities of the
estate considering. The RTC also granted the second
 The settlement of Raymond Triviere’s intestate Motion for Payment, but reduced the sums to be
estate was instituted by his widow, Amy Consuelo paid. LCN filed a Motion for Reconsideration but it
Triviere, before Makati RTC. Atty. Enrique P. Syquia was also denied. On appeal. The CA partially ruled in
(Syquia) and Atty. William H. Quasha (Quasha) of favor of LCN.
the Quasha Law Office, representing the widow and
children of the decedent, respectively, were ISSUES
appointed administrators of the estate of the
Whether petitioner law firm/lawyers are entitled to
deceased. As administrators, Atty. Syquia and Atty.
the award of attorney's fees as co-administrators –
Quasha incurred expenses for the payment of real
YES, to be collected from the shares of the
estate taxes, security services, and the preservation
Triviere children, upon final distribution of
and administration of the estate, as well as litigation
the estate
expenses.
 Atty. Syquia and Atty. Quasha filed before the RTC a RATIO
Motion for Payment of their litigation expenses.
The attorney's fees, therefore, cannot be covered by
Citing their failure to submit an accounting of the
the prohibition in the third paragraph of Section 7, Rule 85
assets and liabilities of the estate under
of the Revised Rules of Court against an attorney, to charge
administration, the RTC denied their motion. Atty.
against the estate professional fees for legal services
Quasha eventually passed away. Atty. Redentor
rendered by them.
Zapata (Zapata), also of the Quasha Law Office, took
over as the counsel of the Triviere children, and However, while petitioner Quasha Law Office,
continued to help Atty. Syquia in the settlement of serving as counsel of the Triviere children from the time of
the estate. death of Atty. Quasha, is entitled to attorney's fees and
 Atty. Syquia and Atty. Zapata filed another Motion litigation expenses as awarded by the RTC, the same may
for Payment, for their own behalf and for their be collected from the shares of the Triviere children, upon
respective clients, asking for the amount of P1Million final distribution of the estate, in consideration of the fact
be taken from the Estate funds to be paid them. that the Quasha Law Office, indeed, served as counsel (not
anymore as co-administrator), representing and
performing legal services for the Triviere children in the
settlement of the estate of their deceased father.
Petition for Review on Certiorari is PARTLY
GRANTED.