ESTATE OF RUIZ V.

CA
FACTS:
 Hilario Ruiz executed a holographic will naming his heirs his son Edmond and his
adopted daughter respondent Maria, and his three granddaughters Maria Cathryn,
Candice Albertine and Maria Angeline, all children of Edmond.
 Ruiz died, and the cash component of his estate was distributed among his heirs.
Edmond, as administrator of the estate, did not take any action for the probate of his
father’s will.
 Four years later, Maria filed with the RTC a petition for probate. Edmond opposed the
petition on the ground that the will was executed under undue influence.
 One of the properties which were bequeathed to Ruiz’ granddaughters was leased out
by Edmond to third persons.
 Edmond then withdrew his opposition to the probate. The court admitted the will to
probate and ordered the issuance of letters testamentary to Edmond.
 Petitioner Estate, with Edmond as administrator, filed an "Ex-Parte Motion for Release of
Funds" praying for the release of the rent payments. Maria opposed, and filed a Motion
for Release of Funds to Certain Heirs praying that the rent payments be released to the
granddaughters.
 The probate court denied the petitioner’s motion and granted Maria’s motion. It ordered
the release of the funds to Edmond, but only "such amount as may be necessary to
cover the expenses of administration and allowances for support" of the testator's
three granddaughters.
 The court also released the leased properties to Maria and the granddaughters.
 CA: affirmed.
ISSUE: WON an allowance may be granted from the funds of the estate for the support of the
testator’s granddaughters.
HELD: NO.
 Sec. 3 of Rule 83 states that “The widow and minor or incapacitated children of a
deceased person, during the settlement of the estate, shall receive therefrom under the
direction of the court, such allowance as are provided by law.”
 It is settled that allowances for support under Section 3 of Rule 83 should not be limited
to the "minor or incapacitated" children of the deceased.
 However, grandchildren are not entitled to provisional support from the funds of the
decedent's estate. The law clearly limits the allowance to "widow and children" and does
not extend it to the deceased's grandchildren, regardless of their minority or incapacity. It
was error, therefore, for the appellate court to sustain the probate court's order granting
an allowance to the grandchildren of the testator pending settlement of his estate.

SANTERO V. CA
FACTS:
 Petitioners Princesita Santero-Morales, Frederico Santero, and Willy Santero are the
children of the late Pablo Santero with Felixberta Pacursa. Respondents were Pablo’s
seven children from Anselma Diaz. Neither of the mothers were married to Pablo.
 Respondents filed a motion for allowance on the ground of support. The motion was
granted.
 Petitioners opposed, stating that the wards for whom allowance is sought are no longer
schooling and have attained majority age so that they are no longer under guardianship.
They likewise allege that the administrator does not have sufficient funds to cover the
said allowance.
ISSUE: WON the granting of the allowance was proper.
HELD: YES.
 The controlling provision of law is not Rule 83, Sec. 3 of the New Rules of Court but Arts.
290 and 188 of the Civil Code.
o Art. 290.Support is everything that is indispensable for sustenance, dwelling,
clothing and medical attendance, according to the social position of the family.
Support also includes the education of the person entitled to be supported until
he completes his education or training for some profession, trade or vocation,
even beyond the age of majority.
o Art. 188.From the common mass of property support shall be given to the
surviving spouse and to the children during the liquidation of the inventoried
property and until what belongs to them is delivered; but from this shall be
deducted that amount received for support which exceeds the fruits or rents
pertaining to them.
 The fact that the private respondents are of age, gainfully employed or married is of no
moment and should not be regarded as the determining factor of their right to
allowances under Art. 188. While the Rules of Court limit allowances to the widow and
minor or incapacitated children of the deceased, the New Civil Code gives the surviving
spouse and his/her children without distinction.
 Since the provision of the Civil Code, a substantive law, gives the surviving spouse and
to the children the right to receive support during the liquidation of the estate of the
deceased, such right cannot be impaired by Rule 83 Sec. 3 of the Rules of Court which
is a procedural rule.