Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 160 views

    San Luis v. San Luis (SPECPRO)

    Uploaded by

    miley
    Felicisimo's wife Felicidad filed a petition for letters of administration in Makati City to settle Felicisimo's estate after his death. Felicisimo's son Rodolfo argued the petition should have been filed in Laguna, where Felicisimo was governor. However, the Court of Appeals ruled that "place of residence" refers to actual residence, not legal residence or domicile. Felicisimo regularly stayed in his house in Alabang, so the petition was properly filed in Makati City, which had jurisdiction over Alabang at the time. Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the petition was filed in the proper venue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    San Luis v. San Luis (SPECPRO)

    Uploaded by

    miley
    160 views1 page
    Felicisimo's wife Felicidad filed a petition for letters of administration in Makati City to settle Felicisimo's estate after his death. Felicisimo's son Rodolfo argued the petition should have been filed in Laguna, where Felicisimo was governor. However, the Court of Appeals ruled that "place of residence" refers to actual residence, not legal residence or domicile. Felicisimo regularly stayed in his house in Alabang, so the petition was properly filed in Makati City, which had jurisdiction over Alabang at the time. Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the petition was filed in the proper venue.

    Original Description:

    San Luis v. San Luis (SPECPRO)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Felicisimo's wife Felicidad filed a petition for letters of administration in Makati City to settle Felicisimo's estate after his death. Felicisimo's son Rodolfo argued the petition should have been filed in Laguna, where Felicisimo was governor. However, the Court of Appeals ruled that "place of residence" refers to actual residence, not legal residence or domicile. Felicisimo regularly stayed in his house in Alabang, so the petition was properly filed in Makati City, which had jurisdiction over Alabang at the time. Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the petition was filed in the proper venue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    160 views1 page

    San Luis v. San Luis (SPECPRO)

    Uploaded by

    miley
    Felicisimo's wife Felicidad filed a petition for letters of administration in Makati City to settle Felicisimo's estate after his death. Felicisimo's son Rodolfo argued the petition should have been filed in Laguna, where Felicisimo was governor. However, the Court of Appeals ruled that "place of residence" refers to actual residence, not legal residence or domicile. Felicisimo regularly stayed in his house in Alabang, so the petition was properly filed in Makati City, which had jurisdiction over Alabang at the time. Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the petition was filed in the proper venue.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    San Luis v.

    San Luis

    FACTS: After Felicisimo died, his wife Felicidad sought the settlement of his estate and
    filed a petition for letters of administration before the RTC of Makati City. Rodolfo, on of the
    children of Felicisimo by his first marriage, filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds of
    improper venue. Rodolfo claimed that the petition for letters of administration should have
    been filed in Laguna because this was Felicisimo’s place of residence prior to his death. In
    response thereto, Felicidad argued that while Felicisimo exercised the powers of his public
    office in Laguna, he regularly went home to their house in Alabang. In dismissing the
    petition for letters of administration, the trial court held that at the time of his death,
    Felicisimo was the duly elected governor and a resident of Laguna, hence the petition
    should have been filed in Laguna and not in Makati City. The CA reversed the order and
    ruled that the term “place of residence” under the rules of court, for purposes of fixing the
    venue of the settlement of his estate, refers to personal, actual or physical habitation, or
    actual residence or place of abode of a person as distinguished from legal residence or
    domicile.

    ISSUE: Whether or not the petition for letters of administration was filed at the proper
    venue.

    HELD: Yes.

    Under Section 1, Rule 73 of the Rules of Court, the petition for letters of administration of
    the estate of Felicisimo should be filed in the RTC of the province “in which he resides at
    the time of his death.” The term “resides” connotes “actual residence” as distinguished
    from “legal residence or domicile.” There is a distinction between “residence” for purposes
    of election laws and “residence” for purposes of fixing venue of actions. For purposes of
    fixing venue under the Rules of Court, the “residence” of a person is his personal, actual or
    physical habitation, or actual residence or place of abode, which may not necessarily be
    his legal residence or domicile provided he resides therein with continuity and consistency.

    In this case, Felicisimo was a resident of Alabang for purposes of fixing the venue of the
    settlement of his estate. The petition was validly filed in the Regional Trial Court which has
    territorial jurisdiction over Alabang Muntinlupa. At the time the petition was filed (December
    17, 1993), Muntinlupa was still a municipality and the branches of the RTC of the National
    Capital Judicial Region which had territorial jurisdiction over Muntinlupa were then seated
    in Makati City.

    Thus, the petition was filed at the proper venue.

    You might also like