Valino v Adriano 2. Art.
199: Whenever two or more persons are obliged to give
Doctrine: When the deceased has not expressly relayed his wishes
where to be buried, the order established under Art. 294 of the Family
Code will apply
Facts:
 Atty. Adriano and Rosario Adriano were happily married until
the relationship turned sour and they were eventually
separated-in-fact
 Years later, Atty. Adriano and his new girlfriend, Valino, lived
together
 Adriano died of acute emphysema, in which Valino organized
the funeral and burial of Adriano
 Adriano was eventually buried in Manila Memorial Park, as
per his own wishes
 Rosario pleaded with Valino that her husband be exhumed
and buried to their family plot at the Holy Cross Memorial
Cemetery
 Valino’s contentions:
o Rosario and Adriano have been separated for more
than 20 years
o Valino acted as a wife of Adriano
o Valino took good care of Adriano
o Rosario neglected her duties as wife when Adriano
got seriously ill and went into a coma
o It was Adriano’s wish to be buried at the Valino
family mausoleum at the Manila Memorial Park
 Rosario’s contentions:
o She is the legal wife, thus she has the right to
decide where her husband should be buried, absent
any clear and convincing evidence that Adriano did
want to get buried at the Manila Memorial Park
Issue: W/N Rosario has the right to decide where her husband should
get buried
Ruling:
Yes
1. As a general rule, the deceased’s wishes prior to his death
will be followed. If such wishes cannot be proved, the
following provisions will apply:
1. Art. 305, in relation to Art. 199 of the Family Code, states
that the duty and the right to make arrangements for the
funeral of a relative shall be in accordance with the order
established for support under Art. 294
support, the liability shall devolve upon the following persons
in the order herein provided:
a. The spouse
3. Moreover, the Civil Code also states that no human remains
shall be retained, interred, disposed of or exhumed without
the consent of the persons mentioned in the abovementioned
article
4. Provided that Valino is merely a common-law wife, the legal
wife has a better right in choosing where her husband should
be buried
5. Furthermore, provided that there are no other witnesses
except Valino who can attest that Adriano really wished to be
buried at the Manila Memorial Park, the wife has a better
right to decide where her husband should be buried
Dissenting Opinion (Leonen, J.)
1. Article 305 (the order of preference of who has the
discretion how, when, and where to bury the
deceased) should only be considered when, first, the
deceased left no explicit instructions on how he
wishes to be interred, and second, when none
among the deceased surviving relations are willing
to make the funeral arrangements and a conflict
arises
2. Provided that Adriano explicitly told Valino where to
be buried, that is enough for Valino to follow his
wishes
3. Valino testified that Adriano told her his wishes long
before his death when he said he wanted to be
buried in Manila Memorial Park and he wants his
“lawn type” to be upgraded to “estate type,” in
which Valino acceded to his request
4. Notable quote by Leonen:
5. “The law reaches into much of our lives while we
live. It constitutes and frames most of our actions.
But at the same time, the law also grants us the
autonomy or the space to define who we are. Upon
our death, the law does not cease to respect our
earned autonomy. Rather, it gives space for us to
speak through the agency of she who may have sat
at our bedside as we suffered through a lingering
illness.”