Scribd
Upload
191 views1 page

04 Avelino V. Ca G.R. No. 115181 March 31, 2000 Topic: Doctrine

The Supreme Court ruled that converting a motion for letters of administration into an action for judicial partition was proper in this case. 1) Section 1 of Rule 74 allows heirs to divide an estate without judicial administration if there are no outstanding obligations and the heirs disagree on partitioning. 2) The trial court correctly based its order on Section 1 of Rule 74, making the conversion procedurally valid. 3) When more expedient remedies like partition are available, heirs are not required to submit to administration and the court may convert to a partition suit upon the heirs' motion.

Uploaded by

Pio Guieb Aguilar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
191 views1 page

04 Avelino V. Ca G.R. No. 115181 March 31, 2000 Topic: Doctrine

The Supreme Court ruled that converting a motion for letters of administration into an action for judicial partition was proper in this case. 1) Section 1 of Rule 74 allows heirs to divide an estate without judicial administration if there are no outstanding obligations and the heirs disagree on partitioning. 2) The trial court correctly based its order on Section 1 of Rule 74, making the conversion procedurally valid. 3) When more expedient remedies like partition are available, heirs are not required to submit to administration and the court may convert to a partition suit upon the heirs' motion.

Uploaded by

Pio Guieb Aguilar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

04 AVELINO v.

CA (a) No partition of the estate is possible in the instant case as no


G.R. No. 115181 March 31, 2000 By: Wenceslao drtemrination has yet been made of the character and extent of
the decedent’s estate.
Topic: Settlement of Decedents’ Estates (b) Petitioner insists that the ROC does not provide for conversion of
a motion for the issuance of letters of administration to an action
Doctrine: for judicial partition. The conversion of the motion was
1. When a person dies intestate or testate, failed to name an executor procedurally inappropriate.
in his will or the executor so named is incompetent or refuses the
trust, or fails to furnish the bond required by the Rules, then the Issue:
decdent’s estate shall be judicially administered and the competent W/N the conversion of the judicial proceeding of a motion for the issuance of
court shall appoit a qualified administration in the order established letters of administration to an action for judicial partition was proper?
in Sec. 6 of Rule 78.
2. The exceptions to the Rule requiring appointment of administrator Held: YES.
are found in Sec. 1 and 2 of Rule 74: (a) extrajudicial settlement by 1. Refer to doctrines 1 and 2. Section 1 Rule 74 allows the heirs to
agreement between parties; and (b)summary settlement of estates of divide the estate among themselves without need of delay and risks
small value. of being dissipated. When a person dies without leaving pending
3. Where the more expeditious remedy of partition is available to the obligations, his heirs, are not required to submit the property for
heirs, then the heirs or the majority of them may not be compelled to judicial administration nor apply for the appointment of an
submit to administration proceedings, and the court may convert an administrator by the court.
heir’s action for letters of administration into a suit for judicial partition 2. The basis for trial court’s order is Section 1 Rule 74, hence, such
upon motion of the heirs. order was not procedurally infirm. It provides that in cases where the
Facts: heirs disagree as to the partition of the estate and no extrajudicial
1. Petitioner Maria Socorro Avelino is a daughter and compulsory heir settlement is possible, then an ordinary action for partition may be
of the late Antonio Avelino Sr. and his first wife private respondent, resported to, as in this case. (REFER TO DOCTRINE 3). Thus, the
Angelina Avelino. Other private respondents are likewise compulsory trial court appropriately converted petitioner’s action for letters of
heirs of Avelino, Sr. and siblings of petitioner. administration into a suit for judicial partition upon motion of the
2. Records reveal that Socorro filed a petition for the issuance of letters private respondents.
of administration of the estate of Antonio Avelino, Sr. who died
intestate on April 10, 1989. She asked that she be appointed the Dispositive Portion: WHEREFORE petition is DENIED. CA Decision
administrator of the estate. AFFIRMED.
3. Angelina and the siblings of petitioner filed their opposition by filing a
motion to convert the said judicial proceedings to an action for
judicial partition. This was duly opposed by Socorro.
4. Lower court granted the opposition of Angelina et al and converted
into judicial partition of the estate of deceased Antonio Avelino, Sr.
5. Socorro filed a petition for CPM R65 before the CA for the GADALEJ
committed by the trial court in converting the judicial proceedings for
the issuance of letters of administration to an action for judicial
partition. This petition was DENIED.
6. Thus, this petition before the court submitting the ff. contentions:

You might also like