Scribd
Upload
49 views1 page

PP-v-Lagrimas

Froilan Lagrimas was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He was also ordered to pay civil indemnity to the heirs of the victim. The court issued a writ of execution to cover the indemnity by levying Froilan's properties. However, his wife Mercedes claimed the properties belonged to their conjugal partnership and could not be liable for Froilan's debt. The court initially agreed but its order was overturned. The Supreme Court ruled that while partnership properties are usually exempt, fines and indemnities imposed on one spouse may be enforced against the partnership assets after covering certain responsibilities, if the liable spouse has no separate property. It remanded the case for further proceedings.

Uploaded by

Lei Jeus Taligatos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
49 views1 page

PP-v-Lagrimas

Froilan Lagrimas was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He was also ordered to pay civil indemnity to the heirs of the victim. The court issued a writ of execution to cover the indemnity by levying Froilan's properties. However, his wife Mercedes claimed the properties belonged to their conjugal partnership and could not be liable for Froilan's debt. The court initially agreed but its order was overturned. The Supreme Court ruled that while partnership properties are usually exempt, fines and indemnities imposed on one spouse may be enforced against the partnership assets after covering certain responsibilities, if the liable spouse has no separate property. It remanded the case for further proceedings.

Uploaded by

Lei Jeus Taligatos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

G.R. No.

L-25355             August 28, 1969

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff, 


vs.
FROILAN LAGRIMAS, accused, 
HEIRS OF PELAGIO CAGRO, heirs-appellants, 
MERCEDES AGUIRRE DE LAGRIMAS, movant-appellee.

Facts:

 Froilan Lagrimas was charged for murder of Pelagio Cargo. Thereafter, the heirs of Cardo filed a
motion for issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment on the property of the accused, which
was granted.
 Lagmiras was convinced and sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua and to
indemnify the appellants. The judgment became final.
 The lower court issued a writ of execution to cover the civil indemnity.
 A levy was had on 11 parcels of land declared for tax purposes in the name of the accused and
the sale thereof at public auction was scheduled. However, the wife of the accused, Mercedes
Lagrimas, filed a petition to quash the said attachment contending that the property belonged
to the conjugal partnership and could not be held liable for pecuniary indemnity the husband
was required to pay.
 Her petition was granted. Another judge set aside the said order.
 But upon Mercedes’ filing a motion for reconsideration, a third judge revived the original order,
declaring such attachment and the writ of execution thereafter issued null and void.

Issue: WON properties from the conjugal properties of Mercedes and Froilan can be held liable for the
pecuniary indemnity incurred by the latter.

HELD:

Yes. Fines and indemnities imposed upon either husband or wife “may be enforced against the
partnership assets after the responsibilities enumerated in article 161 have been covered, if the spouse
who is bound should have no exclusive property or if it should be insufficient. It is quite plain, therefore,
that the period during which such a liability may be enforced presupposes that the conjugal partnership
is still existing for the law speaks of “partnership assets.” That upon complying with the responsibilities
enumerated in article 161, the fines and indemnities imposed upon a party of the conjugal partnership
will be satisfied. If the appealed order were to be upheld, Froilan would be in effect exempt therefrom
and the heirs of the offended party being made to suffer still further; that for a transgression of the law
by either husband or wife, the rest of the family may be made to bear burdens of an extremely onerous
character.

WHEREFORE, the appealed order of August 7, 1965 is set aside and the case remanded to the court of
origin for the reception of evidence in accordance with this opinion. With costs against appellee
Mercedes Aguirre de Lagrimas.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy