Bar Q and A #39

1.) TRUE or FALSE. In reserve troncal, all reservatarios (reservees) inherit as a class and in equal shares regardless of their proximity in degree to the prepositus.

FALSE. Not all the relatives within the third degree will inherit as reservatario, and not all those who are entitled to inherit will inherit in the equal shares. The applicable laws of intestate succession will determine who among the relatives will inherit as reservatarios and what shares they will take, i.e., the direct line excludes the collateral, the descending direct line excludes the ascending, the nearer excludes the more remote, the nephews and nieces exclude the uncles and the aunts, and half blood relatives inherit half the share of full-blooded relatives.

2.) F had three (3) legitimate children: A, B, and C. B has one (1) legitimate child X. C has two (2) legitimate children: Y and Z. F and A rode together in a car and perished together at the same time in a vehicular accident, F and A died, each of them leaving substantial estates in intestacy. 1. Who are the intestate heirs of F? What are their respective fractional shares? 2. Who are the intestate heirs of A? What are their respective fractional shares? 3. If B and C both predeceased F, who are F’s intestate heirs? What are their respective fractional shares? Do they inherit in their own right or by representation? Explain your answer. 4. If B and C both repudiated their shares in the estate of F who are F's intestate heirs? What are their respective fractional shares? Do they inherit in their own right or by representation? Explain your answer.

1. B = 1/2 ; C= 1/2

2. Under Art. 1005, should brothers and sisters survive together with nephews and nieces, who are the children of the decedent’s brothers and sisters of the full blood, the former shall inherit per capita, and the latter per stripes. B and C should inherit both ½ of the whole estate.

3. Under Art. 982, the grandchildren and other descendants shall inherit by right of representation, and if any one of them should have died, leaving several heirs, the portion pertaining to him shall be divided among the latter in equal portions. X should inherit 1/2 share by representation of B. Y and Z should inherit 1/4 share each by representation of C.

4. X inherits 1/3 in his own right; Y inherits 1/3 in his own right; Z inherits 1/3 in his own right; Art. 977 provides that heirs who repudiate their share cannot be represented.

3.) Enrique died, leaving a net hereditary estate of P1.2 million. He is survived by his widow, three legitimate children, two legitimate grandchildren sired by a legitimate child who predeceased him, and two recognized illegitimate children. Distribute the estate in intestacy.

Under the theory of Concurrence, the shares are as follows:

A	Legitimate child (LC)	P200,000
B	Legitimate child	P200,000
C	Legitimate child	P200,000
D	Legitimate child	P0 (predeceased)
E	Legitimate child of D	P100,000 (by right of representation)
F	Legitimate child of D	P100,000 (by right of representation)
G	Illegitimate child	P100,000 (1/2 share of the LC)
H	Illegitimate child	P100,000 (1/2 share of the LC)
W	Widow	P200,000 (same share as LC)

4.) Ricky and Arlene are married. They begot Franco during their marriage. Franco had an illicit relationship with Audrey and out of which, they begot Arnel. Franco predeceased Ricky, Arlene and Arnel. Before Ricky died, he executed a will which when submitted to probate was opposed by Arnel on the ground that he should be given the share of his father, Franco. Is the opposition of Arnel correct? Why?

No, his opposition is not correct. Arnel cannot inherit from Ricky in the representation of his father Franco. In representation, the representative must not only be a legal heir of the person he is representing, he must also be a legal heir of the decedent he seeks to inherit from.

While Arnel is a legal heir of Franco, he is not a legal heir of Ricky because under Art. 992, an illegitimate child has no right to inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of his father or mother. Arnel is disqualified to inherit from Ricky because Arnel is an illegitimate child of Franco and Ricky is a legitimate relative of Franco.

5.) Tessie died survived by her husband Mario, and two nieces, Michelle and Jorelle, who are the legitimate children of an elder sister who had predeceased her. The only property she left behind was a house and lot worth two million pesos, which Tessie and her husband had acquired with the use of Mario's savings from his income as a doctor. How much of the property or its value, if any, may Michelle and Jorelle claim as their hereditary shares?

Art. 1001 of the Civil Code provides, "Should brothers and sisters or their children survive with the widow or widower, the latter shall be entitled to one-half of the inheritance and the brothers and sisters or their children to the other half." Tessie's gross estate consists of a house and lot acquired during her marriage, making it part of the community property. Thus, one-half of the said property would have to be set aside as Mario's conjugal share from the community property. The other half, amounting to one million pesos, is her conjugal share (net estate), and should be distributed to her intestate heirs. Applying the above provision of law, Michelle and Jorelle, Tessie's nieces, are entitled to one-half of her conjugal share worth one million pesos, or 500,000 pesos, while the other one-half amounting to P500,000 will go to Mario, Tessie's surviving spouse. Michelle and Jorelle are then entitled to P250,000 pesos each as their hereditary share.

6.) Luis was survived by two legitimate children, two illegitimate children, his parents, and two brothers. He left an estate of P1 million. Luis died intestate. Who are his intestate heirs, and how much is the share of each in his estate?

The intestate heirs are the two (2) legitimate children and the two (2) illegitimate children. In intestacy the estate of the decedent is divided among the legitimate and illegitimate children such that the share of each illegitimate child is one-half the share of each legitimate child. Their share are:

For each legitimate child – P333,333.33

For each illegitimate child – P166, 666.66 (Art. 983, NCC; Art. 176, FC)

7.) Eugenio died without issue, leaving several parcels of land in Bataan. He was survived by Antonio, his legitimate brother; Martina, the only daughter of his predeceased sister Mercedes; and five legitimate children of Joaquin, another predeceased brother. Shortly after Eugenio's death, Antonio also died, leaving three legitimate children. Subsequently, Martina, the children of Joaquin and the children of Antonio executed an extrajudicial settlement of the estate of Eugenio, dividing it among themselves. The succeeding year, a petition to annul the extrajudicial settlement was filed by Antero, an illegitimate son of Antonio, who claims he is entitled to share in the estate of Eugenio. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that Antero is barred by Article 992 of the Civil Code from inheriting from the legitimate brother of his father. How will you resolve the motion?

The motion to dismiss should be granted. Art. 992 does not apply. Antero is not claiming any inheritance from Eugenio. He is claiming his share in the inheritance of his father consisting of his father's share in the inheritance of Eugenio. (Dela Merced v. Dela Merced, G.R. No. 126707, February 25, 1999)

8.) Dr. Lopez, a 70-year-old widower, and his son Roberto both died in a fire that gutted their home while they were sleeping in their air-conditioned rooms. Roberto’s wife, Marilyn, and their two children were spared because they were in the province at the time. Dr. Lopez left an estate worth P20M and a life insurance policy in the amount of P1M with his three children --- one of whom is Roberto --- as beneficiaries. Marilyn is now claiming for herself and her children her husband’s share in the estate left by Dr. Lopez, and her husband’sshare in the proceeds of Dr. Lopez’s life insurance policy. Rule on the validity of Marilyn’s claims with reasons.

As to the estate of Dr. Lopez:

Marilyn is not entitled to a share in the estate of Dr. Lopez. For purposes of succession, Dr. Lopez and his son Roberto are presumed to have died at the same time, there being no evidence to prove otherwise, and there shall be no transmission of rights from one to the other. (Article 43) Hence, Roberto inherited nothing from his father that Marilyn would in turn inherit from Roberto. The children of Roberto, however, will succeed their grandfather, Dr. Lopez, in representation of their father Roberto and together will receive 1/3 of the estate of Dr. Lopez since their father Roberto was one of the three children of Dr. Lopez. Marilyn cannot represent her husband Roberto because the right is not given by law to a surviving spouse.

As to the proceeds of the insurance on the life of Dr. Lopez:

Since succession is not involved as regards the insurance contract, the provisions of the Rules of Court on survivorship shall apply. Under the Rules, Dr. Lopez, who was 70 years old, is presumed to have died ahead of Roberto, who is presumably between the ages of 15 and 60. Having survived the insured, Roberto’s right as a beneficiary became vested upon the death of Dr. Lopez. When Roberto died after Dr. Lopez, his right to receive the insurance proceeds became part of his hereditary estate, which in turn was inherited in equal shares by his legal heirs, namely, his spouse and children. Therefore, Roberto’s children and his spouse are entitled to Roberto’s one-third share in the insurance proceeds.

9.) At the age 18, Marian found out that she was pregnant. She insured her own life and named her unborn child as her sole beneficiary. When she was already due to give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the father of her unborn child, were kidnapped in a resort in Bataan where they were vacationing. The military gave chase and after one week, they were found in an abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with bolos. Marian and the baby were both found dead, with the baby’s umbilical cord already cut. Pietro survived. 1. Between Marian and the baby, who is presumed to have died ahead? 2. Will Pietro, as surviving biological father of the baby, be entitled to claim the proceeds of the life insurance on the life of Marian?

1. Marian is presumed to have died ahead of the baby. Art. 43 applies to persons who are called to succeed each other. The proof of death must be established by positive or circumstantial evidence derived from facts. It can never be established from mere inference. In the present case, it is very clear that only Marian and Pietro were hacked with bolos. There was no showing that the baby was also hacked to death. The baby’s death could have been due to lack of nutrition.

2. Pietro, as the biological father of the baby, shall be entitled to claim the proceeds of life insurance of Marian because he is a compulsory heir of his child.

10.) A is the acknowledged natural child of B who died when A was already 22 years old. When B's full blood brother, C, died, he (C) was survived by his widow and four children of his other brother D. Claiming that he is entitled to inherit from his father's brother C. A brought suit to obtain his share in the estate of C. Will his action prosper?

No, the action of A will not prosper. On the premise that B, C and D are legitimate brothers, as an illegitimate child of B, A cannot inherit in intestacy from C who is a legitimate brother of B. Only the wife of C in her own right and the legitimate relatives of C (i.e. the children of D as C's legitimate nephews inheriting as collateral relatives) can inherit in intestacy. (Arts. 992, 1001, 1OO5 and 975)