Scribd
Upload
140 views1 page

Teotica Vs Del Val

1) Maria Mortera died in 1955 leaving a will written in Spanish that left various legacies, including P20,000 to Rene Teotico and usufruct of her interest in the Calvo Building to Rene Teotico and his wife Josefina Mortera. 2) Ana del Val Chan opposed the probate of the will, claiming to be an adopted child of Maria's deceased sister and natural child of Maria's deceased brother. She claimed the will was invalid. 3) The court ruled that Ana del Val Chan had no right to intervene because she had no interest in the estate as an heir, executor, legatee, or devisee under the terms of the will. Her

Uploaded by

Leslie Octaviano
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
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
140 views1 page

Teotica Vs Del Val

1) Maria Mortera died in 1955 leaving a will written in Spanish that left various legacies, including P20,000 to Rene Teotico and usufruct of her interest in the Calvo Building to Rene Teotico and his wife Josefina Mortera. 2) Ana del Val Chan opposed the probate of the will, claiming to be an adopted child of Maria's deceased sister and natural child of Maria's deceased brother. She claimed the will was invalid. 3) The court ruled that Ana del Val Chan had no right to intervene because she had no interest in the estate as an heir, executor, legatee, or devisee under the terms of the will. Her

Uploaded by

Leslie Octaviano
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
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

Teotica vs. Del Val G.R. No. L-18753 / March 26, 1965 / Bautista Angelo, J.

/ En banc Facts: Maria Mortera died on July 1955 leaving properties worth P600,000. She executed a will written in Spanish, affixed her signature and acknowledged before Notary Public by her and the witnesses. Among the legacies made in the will was the P20,000 for Rene Teotico who was married to the testatrixs niece, Josefina Mortera. The usufruct of Marias interest in the Calvo Building were left to the said spouses and the ownership thereof was left in equal parts to her grandchildren, the legitimate children of said spouses. Josefina was likewise instituted, as sole and universal heir to all the remainder of her properties not otherwise disposed by will. Vicente Teotico filed a petition for the probate of the will but was opposed by Ana del Val Chan, claiming that she was an adopted child of Francisca (deceased sister of Maria) and an acknowledged natural child of Jose (deceased brother of Maria), that said will was not executed as required by law and that Maria as physically and mentally incapable to execute the will at the time of its execution and was executed under duress, threat, or influence of fear. Issue: WON defendant has right to intervene in this proceeding. Ruling: No. Held: It is a well-settled rule that in order that a person may be allowed to intervene in a probate proceeding he must have an interest in the estate, or in the will, or in the property to be affected by it either as executor or as a claimant of the estate; and an interested party has been defined as one who would be benefited by the estate such as an heir or one who has a claim against the estate like a creditor. Under the terms of the will, oppositor has no right to intervene because she has no interest in the estate either as heir, executor, or administrator, nor does she have any claim to any property affected by the will, because it nowhere appears therein any provision designating her as heir, legatee or devisee of any portion of the estate. She has also no interest in the will either as administratrix or executrix. Neither has she any claim against any portion of the estate because she is not a co-owner thereof, and while she previously had an interest in the Calvo building located in Escolta, she had already disposed of it long before the execution of the will. It is true that oppositor claims to be an acknowledged natural child of Jose Mortera, a deceased brother of the deceased, and also an adopted daughter of Francisca Mortera, a deceased sister of the testatrix, but such claim cannot give her any comfort for, even if it be true, the law does not give her any right to succeed to the estate of the deceased sister of both Jose Mortera and Francisca Mortera. And this is so because being an illegitimate child she is prohibited by law from succeeding to the legitimate relatives of her natural father. The oppositor cannot also derive comfort from the fact that she is an adopted child of Francisca Mortera because under our law the relationship established by adoption is limited solely to the adopter and the adopted and does not extend to the relatives of the adopting parents or of the adopted child except only as expressly provided for by law. Hence, no relationship is created between the adopted and the collaterals of the adopting parents. As a consequence, the adopted is an heir of the adopter but not of the relatives of the adopter.

You might also like