Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
RODRIGUEZ
FACTS:
Respondents filed a complaint against the petitioners claiming that they are the heirs of Antonio Ching. Respondents Joseph and
Jaime are allegedly the children of Antonio with his common-law wife, respondent Mercedes. The action seeks to declare the nullity
of the Agreement, Waiver, Affidavit of Extra-Judicial Settlement, Deed of Absolute Sale, Transfer Certificates of Title, which were all
allegedly executed by defendant Ramon Ching to defraud the plaintiffs.
ISSUE: Whether the subject matter of the case is one of special proceedings or an ordinary civil action.
HELD:
The case is an ordinary civil action. An action for reconveyance and annulment of title with damages is a civil action, whereas
matters relating to settlement of the estate of a deceased person such as advancement of property made by the decedent, partake
of the nature of a special proceeding, which concomitantly requires the application of specific rules as provided for in the Rules of
Court. A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact. It is distinguished
from an ordinary civil action where a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of
a wrong. To initiate a special proceeding, a petition and not a complaint should be filed.
The respondents' resort to an ordinary civil action before the RTC may not be strategically sound, because a settlement proceeding
should thereafter still follow, if their intent is to recover from Ramon the properties alleged to have been illegally transferred in his
name. Be that as it may, the RTC, in the exercise of its general jurisdiction, cannot be restrained from taking cognizance of
respondents' complaint and amended complaint as the issues raised and the prayers indicated therein are matters which need not
be threshed out in a special proceeding.
herein respondents, filed a petition with the respondent RTC of Manila of the judicial settlement of the estate of their late father,
Troadio Manalo, and for the appointment of their brother, Romeo Manalo, as administrator thereof. On the date of hearing, the
court declared all parties in default. The petitioners filed this petition seeking to annul the Resolution of the Court of
3
Appeals affirming the Orders of the Regional Trial Court and the Resolution which denied petitioner' motion for reconsideration.
The petitioner contended that there was absence of earnest efforts toward compromise among members of the same family as
provided in Article 151 of the New Civil Code.
ISSUE: Whether or not Art. 151 of the NCC pertaining to the absence of earnest efforts toward compromise among members of the
same family is applicable in special proceeding.
HELD:
No. Art. 151 of the New Civil Code is applicable only to ordinary civil actions. This is clear from the term 'suit' that it refer s to an
action by one person or persons against another or other in a court of justice in which the plaintiff pursues the remedy which the
law affords him for the redress of an injury or the enforcement of a right, whether at law or in equity. A civil action is thus an action
filed in a court of justice, whereby a party sues another for the enforcement of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong.
Besides, an excerpt form the Report of the Code Commission unmistakably reveals the intention of the Code Commission to make
that legal provision applicable only to civil actions which are essentially adversarial and involve members of the same family.
a petition for letters of administration before the Regional Trial Court of Makati City. She alleged that at the time of his death, the
decedent was residing at 100 San Juanico Street, New Alabang Village, Alabang, Metro Manila.
On February 4, 1994, petitioner Rodolfo San Luis, one of the children of Felicisimo by his first marriage, filed a motion to dismiss on
the grounds of improper venue and failure to state a cause of action. Rodolfo claimed that the petition for letters of administration
should have been filed in the Province of Laguna because this was Felicisimos place of residence prior to his death. The trial court
dismissed the petition for letters of administration. It held that, at the time of his death, Felicisimo was the duly elected governor
and a resident of the Province of Laguna. Hence, the petition should have been filed in Sta. Cruz, Laguna and not in Makati City.
ISSUE: Whether or not venue was properly laid.
HELD:
Yes. Under Section 1, Rule 73 of the Rules of Court, the petition for letters of administration of the estate of Felicisimo should be
filed in the Regional Trial Court of the province "in which he resides at the time of his death. The term "resides" connotes ex vi
termini "actual residence" as distinguished from "legal residence or domicile." This term "resides," like the terms "residing" and
"residence," is elastic and should be interpreted in the light of the object or purpose of the statute or rule in which it is employed. In
the application of venue statutes and rules Section 1, Rule 73 of the Revised Rules of Court is of such nature residence rather
than domicile is the significant factor. Even where the statute uses the word "domicile" still it is construed as meaning residence and
not domicile in the technical sense. Some cases make a distinction between the terms "residence" and "domicile" but as generally
used in statutes fixing venue, the terms are synonymous, and convey the same meaning as the term "inhabitant." In other words,
"resides" should be viewed or understood in its popular sense, meaning, the personal, actual or physical habitation of a person,
actual residence or place of abode. It signifies physical presence in a place and actual stay thereat. In this popular sense, the term
means merely residence, that is, personal residence, not legal residence or domicile. Residence simply requires bodily presence as
an inhabitant in a given place, while domicile requires bodily presence in that place and also an intention to make it ones domicile.
No particular length of time of residence is required though; however, the residence must be more than temporary.