12. PEDRO DE GUZMAN v. JUDGE ZOSIMO ANGELES FACTS: 1.

Manolito de Guzman died in Makati and left personal and real properties. 2. Elaine de Guzman (widow and private respondent) filed a petition for settlement of his intestate estate with list of creditors, probable value of property, compulsory heirs, grant of letters of administration. 3. She filed a motion for writ of possession over 5 vehicles registered under name of Manolito but were in possession of Elaine's father-in-law, Pedro. On the same day, court issued an order directing sheriff to notify Pedro of hearing. Elaine also filed a motion to be appointed as Special Administratrix, which the court granted. 4. Court issued an order to assist Elaine in preserving the estate of Manolito by appointing sheriffs and militarymen. Pedro resisted when they tried to take the vehicles on the ground that they were personal properties and he claims that a near shoot-out occurred. Pedro alleges that he was not given notice of appointment of Elaine as administratrix and court orders were patent nullities. ISSUE: W/N a probate court may appoint a special administratrix and issue a writ of possession of alleged properties of a decedent for the preservation of the estate in a petition for the settlement of the intestate estate even BEFORE the probate court causes NOTICE to be served upon all interested parties? HELD: NO, according to Sec. 3, Rule 79 of the Rules of Court. 1. Facts to be alleged in the application before a court may acquire jurisdiction over the case for probate of will and administration of properties include residence of the deceased and other indispensable facts and circumstances. 2. Court had acquired jurisdiction over the proceedings in the instant case upon filing of Elaine's petition for settlement because she alleged all the jurisdictional facts, pursuant to Sec. 2, Rule 79 ROC. 3. However, there's a need to differentiate between jurisdiction of the probate court over the proceedings for the administration of an estate and its jurisdiction over persons interested in the settlement of the estate of the deceased person 4. Probate court must cause notice through publication of the petition after receiving the same, otherwise the proceeding for the settlement of the estate is void and should be annulled. The requirement as to notice is essential to the validity of the proceeding in order that no person may be deprived of his right to property w/o due process of law. 5. Notice through publication of the petition is jurisdictional, absence of which makes court orders affecting other persons subsequent to the petition void and subject to annulment. Need for proper notice even for the appointment of a special administrator is apparent. 6. No notice was caused to be given by the probate court in the instant case before it acted on Elaine's motions and deprived Pedro (biggest creditor of Manolito's estate) of participating in the proceedings as he has similar interest in the preservation of the estate. Thus, case remanded to lower court for proper hearing with notice to all.