Scribd
Upload
44 views2 pages

Case Title(s) and Citation Legal Question/problem/issue Presented by The Case(s) Why Is This A Problem? Legal Provisions/Legal Principle or Rule Involved Conclusion Mendoza v. Delos Santos

1. The case involves three parcels of land currently owned by respondent Julia Delos Santos that petitioners claim should have been reserved for them. 2. The petitioners argue they are entitled to reservation of the properties as reservatarios or reservees under the legal principle of reserva troncal as grandchildren of Placido and Dominga Mendoza from whom the properties originally came. 3. The court concluded that 1) the properties were not reservable as Julia is not an ascendant of Gregoria and 2) the petitioners cannot be considered reservatarios as they are fourth degree relatives of Gregoria, not within the third degree as required for reservation under Article 891.

Uploaded by

Maireen Jade Namoro
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
44 views2 pages

Case Title(s) and Citation Legal Question/problem/issue Presented by The Case(s) Why Is This A Problem? Legal Provisions/Legal Principle or Rule Involved Conclusion Mendoza v. Delos Santos

1. The case involves three parcels of land currently owned by respondent Julia Delos Santos that petitioners claim should have been reserved for them. 2. The petitioners argue they are entitled to reservation of the properties as reservatarios or reservees under the legal principle of reserva troncal as grandchildren of Placido and Dominga Mendoza from whom the properties originally came. 3. The court concluded that 1) the properties were not reservable as Julia is not an ascendant of Gregoria and 2) the petitioners cannot be considered reservatarios as they are fourth degree relatives of Gregoria, not within the third degree as required for reservation under Article 891.

Uploaded by

Maireen Jade Namoro
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/ 2

Legal

Legal Provisions/Legal
Case Title(s) and question/problem/issue
Why is this a problem? principle or Rule Conclusion
Citation presented by the
Involved
case(s)
Mendoza v. Delos 1. Are the subject The properties subject of the case are The principle of reserva 1. No. The properties are not reservable
Santos properties reservable three parcels of land presently in the troncal is provided in properties. Julia, who holds the
properties? name of respondent Julia Delos Santos. Article 891 of the Civil properties in dispute, is not Gregoria’s
G.R. No. 176422 Lot No. 1646-B, on the other hand, is Code: ascendant; rather, she is Gregoria’s
March 20, 2013 2. Can the petitioners be also in the name of respondent but co- Art. 891. The ascendant collateral relative. The ownership of
considered owned by Victoria Pantaleon, who who inherits from his the properties should be reckoned only
reservees/reservatarios bought one-half of the property from descendant any property from Exequiel’s as he is the ascendant
by virtue of the law on petitioner Maria Mendoza and her which the latter may from where the first transmission
Reserva Troncal? siblings. have acquired by occurred, or from whom Gregoria
Petitioners are grandchildren of Placido gratuitous title from inherited the properties in dispute.
and Dominga Mendoza. Petitioners another ascendant, or a
alleged that the properties were part of brother or sister, is 2. No. Petitioners cannot be considered
Placido and Dominga’s properties that obliged to reserve such reservees/reservatarios as they are not
were subject of an oral partition and property as he may have relatives within the third degree of
subsequently adjudicated to Exequiel. acquired by operation of Gregoria from whom the properties
After Exequiel’s death, it passed on to law for the benefit of came. Petitioners are Gregoria’s fourth
his spouse Leonor and only daughter, relatives who are within degree relatives, being her first cousins.
Gregoria. After Leonor’s death, her the third degree and They cannot even claim representation
share went to Gregoria. Gregoria died belong to the line from of their predecessors as Article 891
intestate and without issue. They which said property grants a personal right of reservation
claimed that after Gregoria’s death, came. only to the relatives up to the third
respondent, who is Leonor’s sister, degree from whom the reservable
adjudicated unto herself all these properties came. The only recognized
properties as the sole surviving heir of exemption is in the case of nephews
Leonor and Gregoria. Petitioners claim and nieces of the prepositus, who have
that the properties should have been the right to represent their ascendants
reserved by respondent in their behalf (fathers and mothers) who are the
and must now revert back to them. brothers/sisters of the prepositus and
relatives within the third degree.

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