G.R. No. L-8218. December 15, 1955
EULOGIA BIGORNIA DE CARDENAS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. LEONCIO CARDENAS AND FLORENCIA RIÑEN, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.
PADILLA, J.:
Cardenas and Florencia Rifien upon the ground that when said marriage was
entered into on 19 April 1948, the plaintiff to whom he had been married on 10
July 1927 was still alive.
In their answer the defendants plead that they have no knowledge or
information as to the marriage performed by Minister George W. Wright on 10 July
1927 uniting Leoncio Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia as husband and wife, nor as
to the authority of the minister to solemnize the marriage; that Leoncio
Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia lived together for sometime, he believing that he
and she had a common home; that the defendant Florencia Eifien married Leoncio
Cardenas in the honest belief and conviction that both parties were capable of
entering into a valid marriage. Upon these allegations they pray that the
complaint be dismissed with costs.
On the date set for the hearing of the case the parties submitted the
following stipulation of facts:
Come now the plaintiff and the defendants, duly, assisted by their respective
attorneys, in the above-entitled case and to this Honorable Court respectfully
submit the following—STIPULATION OF FACTS
1. That plaintiff and defendant Leoncio Cardenas were married at Malate,
Manila, on July 10, 1927, before Minister George W. Wright, as evidenced by the
original marriage contract marked as Exhibit A for the plaintiff.2. That defendants Leoncio Cardenas and Florencia Riñen were married at
Badoc, Ilocos Norte, on April 10, 1948,1 before Justice of the Peace Vicente R.
Campos, as evidenced by a certification issued by the Municipal Treasurer of
said municipality and dated July 27, 1951, marked as Exhibit B for the
plaintiff;3. That defendant Leoncio Cardenas admitted in his sworn affidavit dated
August 17, 1945, and marked as Exhibit C for the plaintiff that he was legally
married to Eulogia Bigornia on July 10, 1927, at Malate, Manila, before Rev.
George W. Wright, minister;4. That the U.S. Veterans Administration foundfrom ,the records on file in
said office that Eulogia Bigornia de Cardenas is the legal wife of Leoneio
Cardenas, as evidenced by the letter of Orvile A. Bobcock, Chief, Registration
Section, Vocational, Rehabilitation and Education Division of said U. S.
Veterans Administration, dated March 11, 1952, and marked as Exhibit D for the
plaintiff;5. That there has been no divorce, separation, dissolution or annulment of
the marriage between the plaintiff and defendant Leoncio Cardenas up to the
present; and6. That the authorization of Rev. George W. Wright to solemnize marriage does
not appear in the, records of the Bureau of Public Libraries, as evidenced by
Exhibit 1-A for the defendants; the said minister is no longer at his residence
as mentioned in the marriage contract, Exhibit A, as evidenced by the fact that
Exhibits 2 and 2-A were returned to sender; and that the office of the Local
Civil Registrar of the City of Manila has no record of the marriage license of
plaintiff and defendant Leoncio Cardenas, as evidenced by Exhibit 3 of the
defendants.Wherefore, plaintiff and defendants respectfully pray that judgment be
rendered based on the above stipulation of facts, without-special pronouncements
as to costs.Parties ask 10 days from today to file their respective memoranda.
Manila,
Philippines, October 7, 1952.(Sgd.) Eulogia Bigornia de Cardenas
Plaintiff(Sgd.)Leoncio Cardenas
Defendant(Sgd.)Florencia Riñen
Defendant(Sgd.) Marcelino N. Sayo
Counsel for plaintiff
Suite 302
Calvo Building Escolta, Manila(Sgd.) Sixto . Brillantes
Attorney for the Defendants
R-202
Digna Bldg., ManilaExhibit “A”
MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE
Municipality of Malate, Province of Manila, July 10, 1927.
Name ……………………………….. Age…………………………………… Father ………………………… Mother ……………………………… Consent of…………………………… Residence………………………….. Birthplace………………………… Nationality ………………………. Occupation ………………………. Number of former marriages …………………………… Was former marriage dissolved by death or divorce, or annulled?….. Blood relationship, if any, existing between contracting
parties……..I hereby certify that I ascertained, previous to the solemnization of the
marriage, the truth of the foregoing statements from the sworn testimony of the
parties, and of the witnesses Esteban. Ripan and Inocencia Rosario. I do further
certify that Leoncio Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia above named, at ray home, 11
Calle Wright, in Malate, Province of Manila, were with their mutual consent
lawfully joined together in matrimony by me in the presence of Esteban Ripan of
16 H. Basco, and Inocencia Rosario of 16 H. Basco, attesting witnesses. And do
further certify that the parties to this marriage are personally known to me and
were satisfactorily identified by the oath of the witnesses, and that upon due
inquiry by me made, there appeared to be no lawful impediment to the
marriage.Witness my hand this 10th day of July, 1927.
Contracting Parties:
(Sgd.) Leoncio Cardenas
(Sgd.) Eulogia
Bigornia(Sgd.) George W. Wright
MinisterWitnesses:
(Sgd,) Esteban Ripan
(Sgd.) Inocencia RosarioExhibit “B”
To Whom It May Concern :
This is to certify that in the Register of Marriage, Series of 1948, under
the custody of the Municipal Treasurer, B&doc, Iloeoa Norbe, there appears
an entry of marriage, to wit:
Register No……………………………………… 42 Name of Husband …………………………… Leoncio Cardenas Age ……………………………………………….. 53 Birthplace…………………………………………. Santa, Ilocos Sur Nationality ……………………………………….. Filipino Occupation………………………………………… Phil. Scout No. of former marriage…………………….. None Blood relationship ……………………………. None Name of father ………………………………. Quiterio Cardenas Nationality …………………………………….. Filipino Name of mother……………………………….. Remigia Belo Nationality……………………………………….. Filipino Name of wife………………………………… Florencia Riñen Age …………………………………………………… 29 Birthplace…………………………………………. Barrio 1, Badoc, Ilocos Norte Nationality………………………………………… Filipino Occupation ………………………………………… Mun. Teacher No. of former marriage………………………… None Blood relationship ………………………… None Name of father ……………………………….. Laureano Olaycay Nationality……………………………………….. Filipino Name of mother……………………………….. Juliana Riñen Nationality……………………………………….. Filipino Date of marriage……………………………… April 19, 1948 Place of marriage …………………………… Justice of the Peace Solemnized by…………………………………. Atty. Vicente R. Campos Title…………………………………………………. Judge Remarks: Witnesses………………………… Romualdo Calaylay Feliza L. Tolentino The above is a true and correct copy from itg original and in witness
whereof, I hereby sign my name at Badoc, Ilocos Norte, thia 27th day of July,
1951.(Sgd.) F. M. TOLENTINO
Municipal Treasurer
Upon this stipulation the Court rendered judgment declaring that the marriage
between the defendants Leoncio Cardenas and Florencia Riñen entered into on 19
April 1948 is null and void ab initio. Coats were taxed against them.
From this judgment the defendants appeal.
The appellants insist on their contention that there is nothing in the
stipulation which shows that Minister George W. Wright had authority to
solemnize the marriage between Leoncio Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia; that it
does not appear in the stipulation of facts that a marriage license was issued
to enable them to marry.
A marriage license as provided for in article 53, paragraph 4, of the new
Civil Code arid in section 7 of the Marriage Law (Act No. 3613), which took
effect on 30 August 1950 and 4 December 1929, respectively, was not required by
General Orders No. 68, the law in force on 10 July 1927 when the marriage was
entered into by and between Cardenas and Bigornia. The marriage certificate
attesting that a marriage ceremony was performed by a minister named George W.
Wright gives rise to the presumption that all legal formalities required by law
had been complied with and fulfilled. If the minister was not authorized to
perform such marriage ceremony it was incumbent upon the defendants to show such
lack of authority on the part of the minister.
In disposing of this appeal we did not overlook article 88 of the new Civil
Code which provides that “No judgment annulling a marriage shall be promulgated
upon a stipulation of facts * * *.” This article and article 101 on legal
separation of the same Code contemplate the annulment of a marriage or legal
separation where the parties might secure the annulment of their marriage or
their legal separation by collusion. In thia case the possibility of such
collusion is remote, because the interest of the two wives are conflicting.
Apart from this, the marriage certificates attached to the stipulation of facts
are evidence and cannot be deemed to be a stipulation of facts.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs against the
appellants.
Paras, C. J., Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Jugo, , Bautista Angelo,
Labrador, Concepcion, and Reyes, J. B. L., JJ., concur.