Special Proceedings Case Digests

Edward M. Grimm, an American resident of Manila, died leaving two wills (one for his Philippine estate, one for extraterritorial estate) favoring his second wife and their children, while giving legitimes to his children from a first marriage. The wills were probated in Utah based on a compromise agreement among all heirs. Concurrently, a daughter from the first marriage initiated an intestate proceeding in Manila, which resulted in a partition of the estate that completely ignored the will. The second wife and her children subsequently sought to probate the will in the Philippines and annul the intestate partition.

Probate of a will is mandatory; a decedent's estate must be settled in a testate proceeding if they left a will, and any pending intestate proceeding must be consolidated with the testate proceeding.

Conflict between the two families of the late Senator Mariano Jesus Cuenco over the settlement of his estate. His children from a first marriage sought intestate proceedings in Cebu, while his surviving widow sought testate proceedings in Quezon City based on a last will naming her as executrix.

The court first taking cognizance of the settlement of the estate of a decedent, not merely the court where the petition is first filed, shall exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of all other courts.

Juan Uriarte y Goite, a non-resident alien, died leaving considerable properties in Negros Occidental and Manila. Vicente Uriarte claimed to be his natural son and sole heir, though he had not yet been judicially acknowledged as such, having filed Civil Case No. 6142 for compulsory acknowledgment during the decedent's lifetime. Higinio Uriarte, a nephew of the decedent, and Juan Uriarte Zamacona were the private respondents who opposed Vicente's intestate petition and initiated probate proceedings based on a will allegedly executed by the decedent in Spain. Under the Judiciary Act of 1948, Courts of First Instance had original exclusive jurisdiction over probate matters, and under Rule 75, …

Wrong venue in estate settlement proceedings is a waivable procedural defect, and a party who delays objecting to proceedings in an improper venue despite knowledge thereof is precluded by laches from later assailing those proceedings; testate proceedings take precedence over intestate proceedings for the settlement of the same estate.