RODRIGO ALBANO, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED SILVERIO AGTARAP, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. CORNELIO AGTARAP ET AL., PLAINTIFFS AND APPELLANTS.

Albano versus Agtarap

The Case

This is the case of Albano versus Agtarap, decided by the Supreme Court in March 1912. Rodrigo Albano, as administrator of the intestate estate of the deceased Silverio Agtarap, brought a civil action against Cornelio Agtarap, Nicolas Agtarap, and Melecio Agtarap, the other heirs of Lucio Agtarap, to recover for Silverio's estate the one fourth share of Lucio's agricultural lands in Laoag, Ilocos Norte, that belonged to Silverio. The case matters because it draws the line between two kinds of proceeding: an ordinary civil action, which may compel the coheirs to deliver a deceased coheir's undivided share to his estate, and the special proceedings for the settlement of that estate, which alone may declare who the heirs are and adjudicate their portions.

Procedural History

Silverio Agtarap died in September 1907. His widow, Juana Domingo, petitioned for the settlement of his intestate estate, and Rodrigo Albano was appointed administrator. As administrator, Albano then filed a civil action, improperly entitled as a claim for the widow's legal portion, against Cornelio, Nicolas, and Melecio Agtarap, who had taken the whole estate of Lucio Agtarap, including Silverio's one fourth part. The trial court rendered judgment ordering that one fourth part of the property be delivered to the administrator of Silverio's estate, so that after proper proceedings the respective portions could be adjudicated to Silverio's widow and other heirs, without special finding as to costs. The defendants appealed, and the case reached the Supreme Court by appeal from that judgment.

Facts

Lucio Agtarap owned several parcels of agricultural land in Laoag, Province of Ilocos Norte. At his death he left four sons, one of whom was Silverio Agtarap. Silverio died on the 10th of September 1907.

Upon Silverio's death, his widow, Juana Domingo, began special proceedings for the settlement of his intestate estate, and Rodrigo Albano was appointed administrator. The three other heirs of Lucio Agtarap, namely his sons Cornelio and Nicolas and his grandson Melecio, had taken to themselves all of the estate left by Lucio, including the one fourth part that belonged to Silverio.

Albano, as administrator, then brought this civil action against those three heirs. The trial court ordered the delivery of one fourth of the property to Silverio's estate, to be followed by proper proceedings for adjudication among Silverio's widow and heirs. The defendants appealed.

Issues

• Whether or not the administrator of the intestate estate of a deceased coheir may maintain a civil action against the other coheirs to compel the delivery to that estate of the deceased coheir's undivided one fourth share in the common property.
• Whether or not the trial court, in such a civil action, may declare who the heirs of the deceased coheir are and adjudicate their respective portions and the widow's lawful usufruct.

Applicable Provisions

The decision applies the rule on the settlement of estates and the declaration of heirs, which confines the determination of heirship and the adjudication of shares to the special proceedings for the settlement of the estate. The Court states the governing principle in these terms:

Only in such special proceedings, wherein the necessary orders can be issued and executed, can findings be made as to who are the heirs and what portions belong to them, the nature of their titles, and in case of usufruct what part pertains to each.

This provision bears on the case because it marks the boundary of the civil action: the action may secure delivery of the share, but it may not decide heirship or portions.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the action was properly one to enforce the coownership in which the hereditary estate was left and, if that coownership existed, to secure the partition of the property among the four lawful coowners, the heirs of Lucio Agtarap, and the withdrawal of Silverio's portion in order to transfer it to his intestate estate. According to law, one fourth of the property belonged to Silverio Agtarap. The judgment of the trial court directing that one fourth part be delivered to the administrator of Silverio's estate was, in the Court's words, entirely in accordance with law.

On the second issue, the Court held that the trial court could not, in this action, declare who the heirs of Silverio were or fix their portions. That determination belongs to the special proceedings in the intestate estate of Silverio Agtarap, where the claim of the administrator on behalf of Juana Domingo for her legal portion as widow may properly be presented, and where it may be proved whether Eugenia Agtarap is a legitimate daughter and sole heir. The Court explained that the widow's lawful usufruct would depend on whether the alleged daughter or the brothers and nephew are entitled to the inheritance, and that only in the special proceedings could findings be made as to the heirs, their portions, the nature of their titles, and the part pertaining to each in case of usufruct. The Court also noted that the plaintiff's claims for the products of the coownership and for certain cattle were ignored by the trial court, and since the plaintiff did not appeal on that omission, it need not be considered.

Doctrine

An administrator of the estate of a deceased coheir may bring a civil action against the other coheirs to compel the delivery to that estate of the deceased coheir's undivided share in the common property, because the action rests on the coownership in which the hereditary estate was left. But the declaration of who the heirs are, the adjudication of their respective portions, the nature of their titles, and the part pertaining to each in case of usufruct belong exclusively to the special proceedings for the settlement of the estate. The civil action secures the share; the special proceedings distribute it.

Disposition

The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment appealed from, with the costs of the instance against the appellants, Cornelio Agtarap, Nicolas Agtarap, and Melecio Agtarap.

Remember This

The line to memorize is this: the ordinary civil action delivers the deceased coheir's undivided share to his estate, but only the special proceedings declare the heirs and adjudicate their portions. Examiners use this case to test the boundary between an action to recover a coheir's share and the settlement proceedings that alone may declare heirship and fix shares.