Case Digest: Cuartico vs. Cuartico, No. 11190-R, November 16, 1955

 Succession | Iron Curtain Rule

Article 992. An illegitimate child has no right to inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of his father or mother; nor shall such children or relatives inherit in the same manner from the illegitimate child.

Ponente:

Hernandez, J.:

Facts:

A Chinese named Juan Clavecilla had three daughters' with different women. His daughters are:

1. Patricia Clavecilla
• Patricia's mother is Susana Germodo.
• Upon Patricia's birth, Susana married Eleno Cuartico and had children: Feliciana, Gregorio, Paula, and Macario; 
2. Ramona Clavecilla 
• Ramona's mother is a woman named Bonifacia with an unknown surname. 
• Ramona died at an early age, single and without issue. 
3. Maria Clavecilla
• Maria's mother is Sinforosa Romano who, after Maria's birth, married Benigno Martinez;

Maria Clavecilla married Macario Cuartico (son of Eleno and Susana) and had five children: Tranquilino, Cipriano, Luis, Demetrio, and Pancrasio Cuartico.

In 1940, Patricia Clavecilla died single and intestate, leaving six parcels of land and houses.

Macario and Maria are both deceased and their children are the petitioners-appellants claiming to be natural nephews of Patricia, based on a 1896 private instrument executed by Juan Clavecilla.

The oppositors-appellees are children of Eleno and Susano, both deceased. They argued Juan Clavecilla was legally married to Bonifacia Cardente, and Romana was their legitimate child. They claim Patricia and Maria, if children of Juan, were adulterous and not validly recognized due to Juan's legal marriage to Bonifacia.

Trial Court: Declared the petitioners and oppositors legal heirs of Patricia Clavecilla.

Issue:

WoN the petitioners are the exclusive heirs of Patricia. NO

Held:

In the trial below, the appellees tried to prove: 

1. that Maria Clavecilla was neither a natural nor an adulterous daughter of Juan Clavecilla but was merely a maid of the latter; 
2. that Maria's real name was Maria Romano; and 
3. that she was born of the wedlock between Sinforosa Romano and Benigno Martinez. 

Appellees admit:

1. that Maria Clavecilla was legally married to their brother, Macario Cuartico; 
2. that from said marriage, the herein appellants were born and that consequently, appellants are entitled to inherit from Patricia Clavecilla namely in representation of appellants' father, Macario, as ostensibly held by the trial court. 

No dispute exists that the appellees are the children of Eleno Cuartico and Susana Germodo. Susana Germodo being the natural mother of Patricia Clavecilla, it results therefore, that the appellees are natural half-brothers, half-sisters and half-niece respectively of Patricia Clavecilla.

We begin with an inquiry into the alleged rights of the appellees to be declared heirs of and to succeed Patricia Clavecilla. During the trial, petitioners adduced in evidence a certificate issued by the parish of Alegria, Cebu attesting to the marriage between Eleno or Lino Cuartico and Susana Germodo, parents of the herein oppositors. Said marriage purportedly took place in Alegria, Cebu on June 1, 1880. 

Remarkably, the oppositors proffered no objection to the admission of said exhibit which explicitly shows that the oppositors' parents were legally married and inferentially that said oppositors were legitimate children.

It is plainly evident, therefore, that the oppositors who are illegitimate children of Susana Germodo and Lino Cuartico are seeking to inherit ab intestato from their half-sister, Patricia Clavecilla. This pretension is certainly not countenanced under Article 943 of the Old Civil Code which provision is substantially reproduced as Article 992 in the New Civil Code. Article 943 reads:

 

Art. 943. A natural child has no right to succeed ab intestato the legitimate children and relatives of the father or mother who has acknowledged it; nor shall such children or relatives so inherit from the natural child.

The reason behind the absolute prohibition on intestate succession is obviously the intervening antagonism and incompatibility between members of the natural family and those of the legitimate family. 

In the words of Manresa: 

Among the natural son and the legitimate relatives or parent the reconcio denies all the code succesoria relationship. Cannot be said relatives and are not entitled to inherit. There is of course a link blood, but this link does not recognize the alleged facts and will stakeholders, the natural child is looked down upon by family legitimate, the family is legitimate, however, hated by the natural son this considers that the privileged situation and the resources for it is deprived, that instead, just go in the natural son of the product vice, the living proof of a barron family. Every relationship is broken ordinarily in life, the law does nothing to recognize truth, avoiding new grounds for resentment. The hojos relatives and legitimate parent who recognized natural child, relatives are all in a straight line ascending or descending, or collateral line. The family is legitimate completely separate from the natural, or individuals to inherit ista Aquila, nor that individuals can inherit those of ista. (p. 127 Comments to the Civil Code.) 

The appellants, on the other hand, pretend to succeed Patricia Clavecilla by reason of their alleged status of natural nephews of the latter. 

The appellees attempt to refute appellants' claims by alleging that Maria Clavecilla was merely a maid and not a child of Juan Clavecilla and could not have been, therefore, a relative of Patricia Clavecilla who was admittedly a daughter of Juan Clavecilla. Moreover, appellees claim, that assuming that Maria was a child of Juan Clavecilla along with Patricia Clavecilla, neither Maria nor Patricia could have been recognized as natural daughters by Juan Clavecilla who was, at the time of their (Maria's and Patricia's) birth legally and validly married with Bonifacia Cardente. 

In view of all the foregoing, and finding that neither the appellants nor the appellees are entitled to succeed ab intestato to the inheritance left by Patricia Clavecilla, it behooves us to call upon the State to succeed.

Wherefore, the appealed order should be, as it is hereby, revoked and the court a quo is hereby instructed, when this decision becomes final, to furnish the provincial fiscal of Negros Oriental a copy of this decision for such action as may be proper pursuant to Rule 92 of the Rules of Court. No special pronouncement as to costs in this instance.