Wills Arts 774 - 804 properties, after both of them shall have died should reverr to
Case # 3 their respective sides of the Family. (Mariano to Locsin’s side
LOCSIN V. COURT OF APPEALS and Catalina to Jaucian’s side) G.R. No. 89783, February 19, 1992, NARVASA, C.J. September, 14, 1948 – Don Mariano Locsin died of cancer and his will was probated in Special proceeding without any Petitioners: opposition from both sides of the family. Mariano B. Locsin, Julian J. Locsin, Jose B. Locsin, Aurea B. Doña Catalina was appointed executrix of his estate assisted Locsin, Matilde L. Cordero, Salvador B. Locsin And Manuel V. by Atty. Lorayes in the probate proceedings Del Rosario – Children of Julian Locsin, one of the children of In the inventory of her husband’s estate, Catalina declared Getulio Locsin and; nephews and nieces of Mariano Locsin that Items # 1 to 33 are private properties of the deceased and Catalina Jaucian – Petition for reversal of the decision of and form part of the capital at the time of Marriage and CA affirming the RTC Items # 34 to 42 are conjugal 9 years after Mariano’s death – Catalina began transferring, Respondents: by sale, donation or assignment, Don Mariano’s as well as her The Hon. Court of Appeals own, properties to their respective nephews and nieces. Jose Jaucian, Florentino Jaucian, Mercedes Jaucian July 6, 1977 - Doña Catalina died Arboleda, Heirs of Josefina J. Borja, Heirs of Eduardo Jaucian October 22, 1973 – Catalina made a will affirming and and Heirs of Vicente Jaucian – Plaintiffs in Civil case for an ratifying the transfers she had made during her lifetime in action for recovery of real property with damages favor of her husband’s, and her own, relatives. After reading the Will – all relatives agreed that there was no Facts: need to submit it to court for probate because the properties After the death of Getulio Locsin, the latter’s estate was devised to them under the Will already been conveyed to divided among his three children (Magdalena, Julian and them by the deceased when she was alive, except some Mariano legacies which the executor of her will or estate. 1908 - Such residential and agricultural properties, inherited by and transferred to Mariano, brought into his marriage to RTC of Legaspi City (Br VII, CV 7152) Catalina Jaucian. Six (6) years after Catalina’s demise – Jaucian nephews and Catalina for her part, brought into the marriage untitled nieces who had already received their legacies and properties which she had inherited from her parents, Balbino hereditary shares from her estate filed an action to recover Jaucian and Simona Anson. the properties which had conveyed to the Locsins during her These properties were augmented by other properties lifetime acquired by the spouses during their marriage which they o Alleging that the conveyances were inofficious, were not blessed with children without consideration and intended solely to The properties of Mariano and Catalina were brought under circumvent the laws on succession. the Torrens System. Title: “Mariano Locsin, married to Catalina July 8, 1985 – RTC renders judgement in favor of Respondents Jaucian – Plaintiffs and against Defendants indeclaring: Mariano Locsin executed a Last Will and Testament instituting o Respondents are the rightful heirs his wife, Catalina, as the sole and universal heir of all his o Deed of sale, donations, reconveyance and properties. exchange and all other instruments conveying part The will was drawn up by his wife’s nephew and trusted legal of any estate of Catalina as Null and void adviser, Atty. Salvador Lorayes. The latter disclosed that the o Ordering Register of Deeds to cancel all certificates spouses being childless, the spouses had agreed that their of title and other transfers
1|Wills_774-803_case3_Locsin v Court of Appeals
o Ordering Petitioners of all properties to the upon, or unduly influenced and morally pressured by respondents her husband’s nephews and nieces (The petitioners) o Ordering Petitioners to pay damages and other to transfer to them the properties expenses o Vicente Juacian is estopped from assailing the genuineness and due execution of the sale of the CA – the Locsins appealed portions of Lot 2020 to himself, Julian and Agaito March 14, 1989 – CA affirmed the RTC’s decision Locsin o There is not the slightest suggestion in the record that ISSUE: Whether or not the Private respondents, nephews and nieces of Doña Catalina was mentally incompetent Doña Catalina J. Vda. De Locsin, entitled to inherit the properties o None of those transactions from 1972 to 1973 was which she had already disposed of more than 10 years before her impugned by the private respondents death? NO o The inventory was signed by her under oath and was approved by the probate Court. Atty. Lorayes would Held: NO not have prepared a false inventory that would have For those properties did not form part of her hereditary estate been prejudicial to his aunt’s interest and to his own, under Art 781 of NCC since he stood to inherit from her eventually. The rights to a person’s succession are transmitted from the o The Lower Courts erred in not dismissing this action for moment of his death, and do not vest in his heirs until such annulment and reconveyance on the ground of time pursuant to Art 777 of NCC prescription which it prescribes 4 years after the Property which Doña Catalina had transferred or conveyed subject transactions were recorded in the Registry of to other persons during her lifetime no longer formed part of Property her estate at the time of her death devolved to her legal heirs; and even of those transfers were, one and all, treated as donations. the right arising under certain circumstances to impugn and compel the reduction or revocation of a decedent's gifts inter vivos does not inure to the respondents since neither they nor the donees are compulsory (or forced) heirs pursuant to Art. 752, in relation to Arts. 1061 Application of the Law: o There is no Basis in the intention of Catalina in transferring the properties that circumvent the law in violation of the private respondent’s rights to her succession. o Respondents are not her compulsory heirs and such have no legitimes o All the respondents had was an expectancy that in nowise restricted her freedom to dispose of even her entire estate subject only to limitation set forth in Art. 750 of NCC o The records do not support that conjecture which Catalina being 90 year old may have been imposed
Pennsylvania Quaker Records: Warrington, York County; Little Brittain, Lancaster County; Centre, Centre County; West Branch, Clearfield County; Dunnings Creek, Bedford County (2 Parts)