Matias vs.

Gonzales
Aurea Matias, being the universal heiress and executrix in the purported will of her Aunt Gabina
Raquel who died single, instituted probate proceeding. However, Basilia, cousin of the
deceased and was over 80 y/o, totally blind opposed to the probate of the alleged will. The
court sustained the said oppostion and denying the petition for probate. Subsequently, Aurea
Matias moved to appeal on the matter. Meanwhile, Basilia Salud moved for the dismissal of
Horacio Rodriguez, as special administrator of the estate of the deceased, and the
appointment, in his stead of Ramon Plata. The Lower court under the respondent judge granted
the opposition and appointed Basilia, Victorina, and Ramon Plata as special administrator and
removed Horacio Rodrigue as an administrator. Upon his removal, he received notices on the
matter but slept on his right to oppose. Matias questioned the order and insist that PNB or BPI
be appointed should the court refused her qualification, but was denied. Later on, due to
inability to perform duties, Basilia withrew. Hence, this petition by Matias against the judge,
Victorina and Plata.

Issue: W/n judge committed grave abuse of discretion for not appointing the named executrix
and the propriety of appointing more than 1 special administratrix.
Held:
SC found the actions of respondent judge cannot be supported with
1. While the probate of the will was denied, the order to this effect is not yet final and
executory. Matias being universal heiress and executrix still has special interest to protect.
2. While generally, there should only be 1 special administrator maybe appointed, probate
court in its discretion, when it deems best, and whenever there are at least two factions among
heirs, may appoint more than 1 special administrator or a special co-administrator but to
administer the whole single estate exercising jointly powers of administration temporarily and
not independently.
3. On technical side, there was late notice of hearing for the removal of Rodriguez as special
administrator, and lack of notice that Basilia and Victorina be appointed as special
administrator while in their motion, it only seek removal of Rodriguez and appointment of
Plata.
The orders complained were annulled and set aside. The lower court should re-hear the matter
of removal of Horacio Rodriguez and appointment of special administrators, after due notice to
all parties concerned, for action in conformity with the views expressed herein, with costs
against respondents Victorina Salud and Ramon Plata.