Baluyut v. Pano (1976) Facts: - Sotero Baluyut died, leaving an estate allegedly valued at not less than P2M.

A few weeks later, his nephew, Alfredo, filed in CFI Quezon City a verified petition for letters of administration, alleging that his widow, Encarnacion, was mentally incapable of acting as administratrix. He had surmised that Sotero had executed a will, and prayed that he be appointed regular administrator but in the meantime, special administrator. CFI appointed his special administrator with P100k bond. - Encarnacion alleged, in her verified opposition, that she was unaware that Sotero executed a will. She said the allegation that she was mentally incapacitated was libelous, and wanted to be appointed administratrix. CFI cancelled Alfredos appointment, and after asking a series of questions to Encarnacion while she was on the witness stand, found her healthy and mentally qualified. - Alfredo filed a motion for reconsideration, and the CFI appointed him and Jose Espino as special administrators. Espino was former governor of Nueva Vizcaya and an alleged acknowledged natural child of Sotero. - Encarnacion wanted Espino to be appointed administrator should she not be appointed administratrix, but she filed an urgent motion to be appointed administratrix. She said that Alfredo had no more interest in the estate because as a mere collateral relative, he was excluded by Espino and other supposed descendants. Alfredo opposed, saying that Espino had other parents, and that Encarnacion was declared incompetent by the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of QC in a special proceeding for guardianship. - At the hearing of Encarnacions urgent motion, no oral and documentary evidence was presented. She was merely asked questions, which she was able to answer. She was appointed regular administratrix, the court convinced of her capacity and that her sufficient understanding justified her appointment. She was issued letters of administration. - Alfredo filed a certiorari case, and the court issued a restraining order enjoining Encarnacion and the Espino spouses and Jude Pano from enforcing the order and disposing of the funds or assets of the estate. Encarnacion said that Alfredo only instituted the administration proceeding after he had failed to get from her a check for P500k belonging to Soteros estate, and that he grossly misrepresented that she was mentally incompetent; the findings of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court were issued in a blitzkrieg manner because it was based on the report of a Dr. Lapuz, filed one day before the order was issued; and besides, its not the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court which should decide her competency to act as administratrix. Issue: Was Encarnacions appointment as administratrix proper? NO. Held: While the lower court was correct in assuming that she, as the surviving spouse, enjoyed preference in the granting of letters of administration, it does not follow that she should be named administratrix without conducting a full-dress hearing on her competency to discharge that trust. A hearing has to be held in order to ascertain fitness to act as executor, even if a person has been designated as the

executor in a will. Such designation is not binding on the court and does not automatically entitle him to the issuance of letters testamentary. He might have been fit to act as executor when the will was executed but supervening circumstances might have rendered him unfit for that position. In this case, the court merely interrogated her in order to satisfy itself on her mental capacity. It did not give Alfredo a chance to contest her qualifications. He was the one who had raised the issue as to her competency. The probate court had wrongly assumed that he had no interest in the estate as, it has now turned out, he is one of the legatees named in the will. The proceeding in the lower court must be converted into a testamentary proceeding. After the will is probated, the prior letters of administration should be revoked and proceedings for the issuance of letters testamentary or of administration under the will should be conducted. It is imperative that a hearing be held to determine Encarnacions fitness to act as executrix or administratrix. Persons questioning her capacity should be given an adequate opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. The lower court departed from the usual course of probate procedure in summarily appointing Mrs. Baluyut as administratrix on the assumption that Alfredo was not an interested party. Doctrine/s: Being named executor in a will does not automatically grant letters testamentary or of administration to such persons as such is not binding on the court. A hearing must be held to determine the competence of the administrator/administratrix or executor/executrix to perform their duties, and those who oppose such must be given adequate opportunity to be heard and to present their evidence. Other courts findings on persons competence is also not binding on the probate court. Dispositive: Order appointing Encarnacion as administratrix is SET ASIDE, letters of administration issued to her are CANCELLED, and the probate court is directed to conduct further proceedings. Digested by: Feliciano

SpecPro Dela Cerna | 1