ESTATE OF HILARIO M. RUIZ V.

CA distribution of the testator’s properties, specifically the

GR NO. 118671, JANUARY 29, 1996 Valle Verde property and the Blue Ridge apartments, in
accordance with the provisions of the holographic will.
FACTS:
Hilario M. Ruiz executed a holographic will naming as The probate court denied petitioner’s motion for
his heirs his only son, Edmond Ruiz, his adopted
release of funds but granted respondent Montes’
daughter, private respondent Maria Pilar Ruiz Montes, motion in view of petitioner’s lack of opposition. It thus
and his three granddaughters, private respondents
ordered the release of the rent payments to the
Maria Cathryn, Candice Albertine and Maria Angeline, decedent’s three granddaughters. It further ordered the
all children of Edmond Ruiz.
delivery of the titles to and possession of the properties
The testator bequeathed to his heirs substantial cash, bequeathed to the three granddaughters and
personal and real properties and named Edmond Ruiz
respondent Montes upon the filing of a bond of
executor of his estate. P50,000.00.
When Hilario died, the cash component of his estate Petitioner moved for reconsideration alleging that he
was distributed among Edmond and private
actually filed his opposition to respondent Montes’
respondents in accordance with the decedent’s will. motion for release of rent payments which opposition
However, Edmond did not take any action for the
the court failed to consider.
probate of his father’s holographic will.
Petitioner, through counsel, manifested that he was
Four years after the testator’s death, it was private withdrawing his motion for release of funds in view of
respondent Maria Pilar who filed a petition for the
the fact that the lease contract over Valle Verde
probate and approval of the will and for the issuance of property had been renewed for another
letters testamentary to Edmond but the latter opposed
year.
the petition on the ground that the will was executed
under undue influence.
Despite petitioner’s manifestation, the probate court,
on December 22, 1993, ordered the release of the funds
One of the properties of the estate - the house and lot
to Edmond but only "such amount as may be necessary
which the testator bequeathed to Maria Cathryn, to cover the expenses of administration and allowances
Candice Albertine and Maria Angeline was leased out by
for support" of the testator’s three granddaughters
Edmond Ruiz to third persons. subject to collation and deductible from their share in
the inheritance. The court, however, held in abeyance
The probate court ordered Edmond to deposit with the the release of the titles to respondent Montes and the
Branch Clerk of Court the rental deposit and payments
three granddaughters until the lapse of six months from
totalling P540,000.00 representing the one-year lease of the date of First publication of the notice to creditors
the Valle Verde property.
ISSUES:
In compliance, Edmond turned over the amount of
Whether the probate court, after admitting the will to
P348,583.56, representing the balance of the rent after probate but before payment of the estate’s debts and
deducting P191,416.14 for repair and maintenance
obligations, has the authority:
expenses on the estate. (1) to grant an allowance from the funds of the estate
for the support of the testator’s grandchildren;
Edmond moved for the release of P50,000.00 to pay the (2) to order the release of the titles to certain heirs; and
real estate taxes on the real properties of the estate.
(3) to grant possession of all properties of the estate to
The probate court approved the release of P7,722.00. the executor of the will.
Edmond withdrew his opposition to the probate of the HELD:
will. Consequently, the probate court, on May 18, 1993,
(1)No
admitted the will to probate and ordered the issuance Section 3 of Rule 83 of the Revised Rules of Court
of letters testamentary to Edmond conditioned upon
provides:
the filing of a bond in the amount of P50,000.00. The "Sec. 3. Allowance to widow and family. - The widow
letters testamentary were issued on June 23, 1993.
and minor or incapacitated children of a deceased
person, during the settlement of the estate, shall
Petitioner Testate Estate of Hilario Ruiz as executor,
receive therefrom under the direction of the court, such
filed an "Ex-Parte Motion for Release of Funds." It allowance as are provided by law."
prayed for the release of the rent payments deposited
Grandchildren are not entitled to provisional support
with the Branch Clerk of Court. from the funds of the decedent’s estate. The law clearly
limits the allowance to "widow and children" and does
Respondent Montes opposed the motion and not extend it to the
concurrently filed a "Motion for Release of Funds to
deceased’s grandchildren, regardless of their minority
Certain Heirs" and Motion for Issuance of Certificate of or incapacity. It was error, therefore, for the appellate
Allowance of Probate Will." Montes prayed for the
court to sustain the probate court’s order granting an
release of the said rent payments to Maria Cathryn, allowance to the grandchildren of the testator pending
Candice Albertine and Maria Angeline and for the
settlement of his estate.
 paid, much less ascertained. The estate tax is one of
(2) No those obligations that must be paid before distribution
Respondent courts also erred when they ordered the of the estate. If not yet paid, the rule requires that the
release of the titles of the bequeathed properties to distributees post a bond or make such provisions as to
private respondents six months after the date of first meet the said tax obligation in proportion to their
publication of notice to creditors. An order releasing respective shares in the inheritance. Notably, at the
titles to properties of the estate amounts to an advance time the order was issued the properties of the estate
distribution of the estate which is allowed only under had not yet been inventoried and appraised.
the following conditions:
"Sec. 2. Advance distribution in special proceedings. - It was also too early in the day for the probate court to
Nothwithstanding a pending controversy or appeal in order the release of the titles six months after admitting
proceedings to settle the estate of a decedent, the court the will to probate. The probate of a will is conclusive as
may, in its discretion and upon such terms as it may to its due execution and extrinsic validity and settles
deem proper and just, permit that such part of the only the question of whether the testator, being of
estate as may not be affected by the controversy or sound mind, freely executed it in accordance with the
appeal be distributed among the heirs or formalities prescribed by law. Questions as to the
legatees, upon compliance with the conditions set forth intrinsic validity and efficacy of the provisions of the
in Rule 90 of these Rules." will, the legality of any devise or legacy may be raised
even after the will has been authenticated.
And Rule 90 provides that:
"Sec. 1. When order for distribution of residue made. - (3) No
When the debts, funeral charges, and expenses of Petitioner cannot correctly claim that the assailed order
administration, the allowance to the widow, and deprived him of his right to take possession of all the
inheritance tax, if any, chargeable to the estate in real and personal properties of the estate. The right of
accordance with law, have been paid, the court, on the an executor or administrator to the possession and
application of the executor or administrator, or of a management of the real and personal properties of the
person interested in the estate, and after hearing upon deceased is not absolute and can only be exercised "so
notice, shall assign the residue of the estate to the long as it is necessary for the payment of the debts and
persons entitled to the same, naming them and the expenses of administration,"
proportions, or parts, to which each is entitled, and
such persons may demand and recover their respective  Section 3 of Rule 84 of the Revised Rules of Court
shares from the executor or administrator, or any other explicitly provides:
person having the same in his possession. If there is a "Sec. 3. Executor or administrator to retain whole
controversy before the court as to who are the lawful estate to pay debts, and to administer estate not willed.
heirs of the deceased person or as to the distributive - An executor or administrator shall have the right to
shares to which each person is entitled under the law, the possession and management of the real as well as
the controversy shall be heard and decided as in the personal estate of the deceased so long as it is
ordinary cases. necessary for the payment of the debts and expenses
for administration."
No distribution shall be allowed until the payment of
the obligations above-mentioned has been made or When petitioner moved for further release of the funds
provided for, unless the distributees, or any of them, deposited with the clerk of court, he had been
give a bond, in a sum to be fixed by the court, previously granted by the probate court certain
conditioned for the payment of said obligations within amounts for repair and maintenance expenses on the
such time as the court directs. properties of the estate, and payment of the real estate
taxes thereon. But petitioner moved again for the
In settlement of estate proceedings, the distribution of release of additional funds for the same reasons he
the estate properties can only be made: (1) after all the previously cited. It was correct for the probate court to
debts, funeral charges, expenses of administration, require him to submit an accounting of the necessary
allowance to the widow, and estate tax have been paid; expenses for administration before releasing any
or (2) before payment of said obligations only if the further money in his favor.
distributees or any of them gives a bond in a sum fixed
by the court conditioned upon the payment of said It was relevantly noted by the probate court that
obligations within such time as the court directs, or petitioner had deposited with it only a portion of the
when provision is made to meet those obligations. one-year rental income from the Valle Verde property.
Petitioner did not deposit its succeeding rents after
In the case at bar, the probate court ordered the renewal of the lease. Neither did he render an
release of the titles to the Valle Verde property and the accounting of such funds.
Blue Ridge apartments to the private respondents after
the lapse of six months from the date of first publication Petitioner must be reminded that his right of ownership
of the notice to creditors. The questioned order speaks over the properties of his father is merely inchoate as
of "notice" to creditors, not payment of debts and long as the estate has not been fully settled and
obligations. Hilario Ruiz allegedly left no debts when he partitioned. As executor, he is a mere trustee of his
died but the taxes on his estate had not hitherto been father’s estate. The funds of the estate in his hands are
trust funds and he is held to the duties and
responsibilities of a trustee of the highest order.

He cannot unilaterally assign to himself and possess all

his parents’ properties and the fruits thereof without
first submitting an inventory and appraisal of all real
and personal properties of the deceased, rendering a
true account of his administration, the expenses of
administration, the amount of the obligations and
estate tax, all of which are subject to a determination by
the court as to their veracity, propriety and justness.