Florentino v. Florentino

– Florentino v. Florentino ENCARNACION FLORENTINO, ET vs. MERCEDES FLORENTINO, ET AL., defendants-appellees. FLORENTINO v FLORENTINO G.R. No. L-14856

AL., plaintiffs-appellants,

November 15, 1919

Doctrine: Florentino settles a number of issues. First, with respect to the right of representation accorded the reservee, the same may be exercised only by such person seeking to represent if he himself is a relative within the third degree of the prepositus. Second, Florentino rejected the theory that if the reservable property does not fall into the hands of strangers, then the reserva is not applicable. Thus, whether or not the reservable property was devised or willed by the reservor to a relative of the prepositus coming from the same line as the origin, the reservable nature of the property is not lost. From this principle arises an inference that the reservable property is not part of the estate of the reservor upon his demise. Third, there is an affirmation that the title of the reservor to the reservable property is not in the nature of full dominion, by reason of the reservation provided by law. However, there is serious doubt as to the validity of this proposition in the light of the more recent pronouncements of the Court. That the reservor is a mere usufructuary (as intimated in Florentino), is contradicted by later decisions characterizing the title of the reservor to the reservable property as absolute but possessed with a resolutory condition. Notice, however, that the court, in the dispositive portion of this decision, committed an error in the distribution of the reservable property. Antonia

Apolonio II +Jose Ramon Miguel Victorino Antonio Rosario

Juan +Maria Encarnacion +Isabel +Espirita Emilia Jesus Lourdes Caridad Dolores

Gabriel +Pedro Jose Asunsion

Magdalena

Severina Mercedes Apolonio III

FACTS: 1. ApolonioIsabeloFlorentino II married Antonia Faz, with whom he had 9 children. When his wife died, Apolonio married Severina, with whom he had 2 children- Mercedes and Apolonio III. 2. Apolonio II died and was survived by his second wife and the ten children, Apolonio III, being born after Apolonio II died. 3. He was able to execute a will instituting as universal heirs his 10 children, the posthumous Apolonio III and his widow, Severina, and declaring that all of his property should be divided among all of his children in both marriages. 4. In the partition of his estate, Apolonio III was given 6 parcels of land and some personal property of Apolonio II. 5. Apolonio III later died and his mother, Severina, succeeded to all these properties. She subsequently died, leaving a will instituting as her universal heiress her only living daughter, Mercedes. 6. As such heir, Mercedes took possession of all the property left at the death of her mother, including the property inherited by Severina from Apolonio III, which is said to be reservable property. Accordingly, Mercedes had been gathering the fruits of the parcels of land. 7. The children of Apolonio II by his first wife, as well as his grandchildren by the first marriage, instituted an action for recovery of their share of the reservable property. The defendants contend that no property can be reserved for the plaintiffs inasmuch as there is a forced heiress and the obligation to reserve is secondary to the duty to respect the legitime. 8. Also, the danger that the property coming from the same line might fall into the hands of strangers has been avoided. ISSUE: WON the property is subject to reserve troncal or not HELD: Yes, it is subject to reserve troncal 1. Even if Severina left in her will said property to her only daughter and forced heiress, nevertheless, this property has not lost its reservable nature. The posthumous son, Apolonio III, acquired the property by lucrative title or by inheritance from his legitimate father. 2. Although such property was inherited by Severina, nevertheless, she was duty bound to reserve the property thus acquired for the benefit of the relatives within the third degree of the line from which such property came. Ascendants do not inherit the reservable property, but its enjoyment , use and trust merely for the reason that the law imposes the obligation to reserve and preserve the same for certain designated persons, who on the death of said ascendants- reservoir, acquire the ownership of said property in fact and operation of law in the same manner as forced heirs.

3. There are then 7 reservees entitled to the reservable property left at the death of Apolonio III, to wit: a.

Apolonio II’s 3 children from his first marriage

b.

The children of Apolonio II’s deceased children, 12 in all

c.

Mercedes, Apolonio III’s sister.

All of the plaintiffs are relatives of the posthumous son within the third degree (four as halfsiblings and 12 as his nephews and nieces). As the first four are his relatives within the third degree in their own right and the others by right of representation, all are entitled as reservees. 4. The properties in question came from the common ancestor, Apolonio II, and when, on the death of Apolonio III without issue, the same passed by operation of law into the hands of his legitimate mother, Severina; it became reservable property with the object that the same should not fall into the possession of persons other than those comprehended within the order of succession traced by the law from Apolonio II, the origin of the property. 5. Severina could have disposed in her will all her own property in favor of her only living daughter, Mercedes, as forced heir. But the provision concerning the reservable property reducing the rights of the other reserves is null and void inasmuch as said property is not her own and she has only the right of usufruct or of fiduciary, with the right to deliver the same to the reserves. 6. Reservable property neither comes nor falls under the absolute dominion of the ascendant who inherits and receives the same from his descendant, therefore, it does not form part of his property nor become the legitimeof his forced heirs. It becomes his own property only in case all the relatives of his descendant died, in which case, the said reservable property loses such character.