Case Digest: Quasha Ancheta Peña v.

LCN Construction Corporation

G.R. No. 174873, August 26, 2008

Parties:

 Petitioner: Quasha Ancheta Peña and Nolasco Law Office (for its own behalf and
representing the heirs of Raymond Triviere)
 Respondent: LCN Construction Corporation

Summary: The case revolves around the settlement of the estate of the deceased
Raymond Triviere. Atty. Syquia and Atty. Quasha were appointed administrators of the
estate. They fulfilled their duties but were not paid for over a decade. They filed a
Motion for Payment in the trial court, which was granted. LCN Construction Corporation,
the remaining claimant of the estate, opposed the motion. On appeal, the Court of
Appeals partially granted LCN's petition, deleting certain awards to the heirs and
administrators. The Supreme Court (SC) held that the award to the heirs constituted
distribution of the estate but awarded attorney’s fees to the petitioner, to be sourced
from the Triviere children's shares upon final distribution of the estate.

Doctrine: Section 2, Rule 82 of the Rules of Court provides the modes for replacing an
administrator of an estate upon the death of an administrator. The court may remove or
accept the resignation of an executor or administrator. If there is no remaining executor
or administrator, administration may be granted to any suitable person.

Facts:

1. Raymond Triviere passed away in December 1987. Atty. Syquia and Atty. Quasha
were appointed administrators of his estate.
2. The administrators incurred expenses for the estate, including litigation expenses.
They filed a Motion for Payment for their services.
3. The trial court initially denied the motion due to failure to submit an accounting
of estate assets and liabilities.
4. Atty. Quasha passed away in 1996. Atty. Zapata took over as counsel for the
Triviere children.
5. In 2002, Atty. Syquia and Atty. Zapata filed another Motion for Payment,
requesting P1M to be taken from the estate funds for distribution.
6. LCN opposed, stating that the claim against the estate was unpaid, barring
distribution.
7. The Court of Appeals partially granted LCN's petition, deleting certain awards.
 8. The SC held that the award to the heirs constituted distribution of the estate, but
granted attorney’s fees to the petitioner, to be sourced from the Triviere
children's shares upon final distribution.

Issues:

1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the award to the heirs is a
distribution of the residue of the estate. (Answer: No)
2. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in nullifying the award of attorney’s fees to
the co-administrators. (Answer: Yes)

Ruling: The petition was partly granted.

Ratio:

1. The trial court's grant of the award to the heirs prior to settling all estate
obligations didn't comply with legal requirements. The Court of Appeals was right
in finding that the award to the heirs constituted distribution of the estate, and its
deletion was appropriate due to the pending claim by LCN against the estate.
2. The petitioner's change in theory regarding its role as co-administrator was
noted. The SC exercised leniency on this rule due to the conflicting arguments
presented by the petitioner. Quasha Law Office served as counsel for the Triviere
children but didn't substitute Atty. Quasha as administrator upon his death.
3. The court has jurisdiction to appoint an administrator, and the records showed
no evidence of the petitioner becoming a co-administrator after Atty. Quasha's
death. The petitioner's law office, serving as counsel, is entitled to attorney’s fees
sourced from the Triviere children's shares upon final estate distribution.

This case clarifies the modes of replacing an administrator upon death, emphasizes the
need for compliance with legal requirements in estate distribution, and addresses the
petitioner's change in legal theory on appeal.