Bonnevie v. Pardo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Plaintiffs, as heirs of the deceased Pedro Bonnevie y Orsetty, filed an action against the defendants to recover P18,000. They alleged that Pedro Bonnevie was a creditor of Manuel Pardo y Ferrer for this amount, representing Pedro's share in the profits of the firm "Pardo y Cia." Manuel Pardo y Ferrer allegedly acknowledged the debt but died before formalizing it. His heirs, the defendants, allegedly acknowledged the debt in a public instrument dated July 25, 1927, and voluntarily assumed the obligation to pay. Procedural History: After the complaint was filed, one of the defendants, Manuel Pardo y Cecilio, died. The complaint was amended, and summons was served upon his executor, Francisco Romero. The executor filed a demurrer to the amended complaint, arguing lack of jurisdiction over the person and subject matter, and lack of juridical personality of the plaintiffs. The trial court sustained the demurrer, opining that the plaintiffs, as heirs, could not bring the action without being declared as such in a special proceeding. The plaintiffs excepted and refused to amend. The court then dismissed the complaint as to the executor. The plaintiffs excepted again and moved for a new trial, which was denied. The orders sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the complaint were appealed. The Petition: The plaintiffs-appellants assigned as errors the trial court's holding that the demurrer was well-founded and its denial of the motion for a new trial.
Issue(s)
Whether the plaintiffs, as heirs, can maintain an action for the recovery of a sum of money without being declared as such in a special proceeding. Whether the action against the executor of the deceased debtor's estate was the proper remedy.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the trial court. The Court held that while heirs of legal age, in the absence of debts, may bring an action for recovery without prior declaration as heirs, a claim against a deceased debtor's estate must be presented as a claim to the committee appointed in the intestate or testamentary proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of heirs maintaining an action without prior declaration: The Court reiterated the established doctrine that when a creditor dies leaving no pending obligations and his heirs are all of legal age, said heirs may bring an action for the recovery of a credit without the necessity of instituting intestate or testamentary proceedings. This is based on the principle that rights to succession are transmitted from the moment of death, and heirs become co-owners of the undivided estate. If there are no debts, there is no occasion for the intervention of a judicial administrator, and the heirs may administer or partition the property by mutual agreement. The Court cited Bondad vs. Bondad and Ilustre vs. Alaras Frondosa in support of this principle, emphasizing that the property belongs to the heirs at the moment of the ancestor's death. On the issue of the proper remedy against the executor: The Court held that an action for the recovery of a sum of money due from a deceased person during his lifetime should be presented as a claim to the committee appointed in the intestate or testamentary proceedings of the debtor. Any pending case against the deceased should be discontinued to give way to such a claim. Therefore, the action brought by the plaintiffs against the executor did not lie because their claim should have been presented to the committee appointed in the testamentary proceedings of Manuel Pardo y Cecilio. This procedure must be followed even if the obligation assumed by the defendants was joint and several. The Court found the order sustaining the demurrer filed by the executor to be legally supported on this ground.
Main Doctrine
Heirs who are all of legal age and when there are no outstanding debts against the estate may bring an action for the recovery of a credit without the necessity of prior declaration as heirs in a special proceeding. However, a claim against a deceased debtor's estate must be presented as a claim to the committee appointed in the intestate or testamentary proceedings.