ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1916 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 10649 March 1, 1916 - BENITO AFRICA v. KURT W. GRONKE

    034 Phil 50

  • G.R. No. 10838 March 1, 1916 - ALFONSA CARLOS ET AL. v. MLA. ELECTRIC RAILROAD & LIGHT COMPANY

    034 Phil 55

  • G.R. No. 11148 March 1, 1916 - LIM BUN SU v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 62

  • G.R. No. 10563 March 2, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO BONIFACIO

    034 Phil 65

  • G.R. No. 11262 March 2, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. GREGORIO T. GIMENEZ

    034 Phil 74

  • G.R. No. 7676 March 3, 1916 - JOSE LINO LUNA v. ESTEBAN ARCENAS

    034 Phil 80

  • G.R. No. 10265 March 3, 1916 - EUTIQUIANO CUYUGAN v. ISIDORO SANTOS

    034 Phil 100

  • G.R. No. 10918 March 4, 1916 - WILLIAM FRESSEL ET AL. v. MARIANO UY CHACO SONS & COMPANY

    034 Phil 122

  • G.R. No. 10971 March 4, 1916 - BEAUMONT & TENNEY v. BERNARD HERSTEIN

    034 Phil 127

  • G.R. No. 11216 March 6, 1916 - COMPAÑIA GENERAL DE TABACOS DE FILIPINAS v. BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONERS

    034 Phil 136

  • G.R. No. 8473 March 7, 1916 - SANTIAGO YASON v. JULIO MAGSAKAY

    034 Phil 143

  • G.R. No. 10437 March 7, 1916 - JESUSA LAUREANO v. EUGENIO KILAYCO

    034 Phil 148

  • G.R. No. 10729 March 7, 1916 - UY PO v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 153

  • G.R. No. 10793 March 17, 1916 - GOV’T. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ILOILO

    034 Phil 157

  • G.R. No. 11196 March 8, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. EUSTAQUIO YUMUL

    034 Phil 169

  • G.R. No. 11321 March 8, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. SY BUN KUE

    034 Phil 176

  • G.R. No. 10051 March 9, 1916 - ERLANGER & GALINGER v. SWEDISH EAST ASIATIC CO.

    034 Phil 178

  • G.R. No. 11115 March 10, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. SILVESTRE YU TUICO

    034 Phil 209

  • G.R. No. 10297 March 11, 1916 - AGAPITO BONZON v. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF NEW YORK ET AL.

    034 Phil 211

  • G.R. No. 8135 March 13, 1916 - FRED J. LEGARE ET AL. v. ANTONIA CUERQUES

    034 Phil 221

  • G.R. No. 10449 March 13, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. ACLEMANDOS BLEIBEL

    034 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. 8092 March 14, 1916 - RUFINA BONDAD ET AL. v. VENANCIO BONDAD ET AL.

    034 Phil 232

  • G.R. No. 10578 March 14, 1916 - PACIFIC COMMERCIAL COMPANY v. MAURICIA SOTTO

    034 Phil 237

  • G.R. No. 11000 March 14, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. VALERIO MENDIETA

    034 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. 9497 March 15, 1916 - SIMONA GALICIA v. TEODORA NAVARRO

    034 Phil 245

  • G.R. No. 11467 March 15, 1916 - NG HIAN v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 248

  • G.R. No. 10462 March 16, 1916 - ANDREA DUMASUG v. FELIX MODELO

    034 Phil 252

  • G.R. No. 9164 March 17, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. VY BO TEC

    034 Phil 260

  • G.R. No. 10354 March 17, 1916 - FELIPE DORADO v. AGRIPINO VIRIÑA

    034 Phil 264

  • G.R. No. 10718 March 17, 1916 - United States v. Ramon FERRER

    034 Phil 277

  • G.R. No. 11464 March 17, 1916 - VICTOR BIUNAS v. BENITO MORA

    034 Phil 282

  • G.R. No. 8954 March 21, 1916 - DOROTEA CABANG v. MARTIN DELFINADO

    034 Phil 291

  • G.R. No. 9340 March 21, 1916 - MARGARITO PENALOSA LO INTONG v. ISIDORA JAMITO ET AL.

    034 Phil 303

  • G.R. No. 10889 March 21, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. VALERIO MARTINEZ

    034 Phil 305

  • G.R. No. 11098 March 21, 1916 - CO PAIN v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 310

  • G.R. No. 11154 March 21, 1916 - E. MERRITT v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS

    034 Phil 311

  • G.R. No. 8979 March 22, 1916 - ADRIANO PANLILIO v. PROVICIAL BOARD OF PAMPANGA ET AL.

    034 Phil 323

  • G.R. No. 10978 March 22, 1916 - SIXTO MANLAGNIT v. ALFONSO SANCHEZ DY PUICO

    034 Phil 325

  • G.R. No. 11315 March 22, 1916 - DIONISION CHANCO v. CARLOS IMPERIAL

    034 Phil 329

  • G.R. No. 8941 March 23, 1916 - GUILLERMO VELOSO v. LORENZO BECERRA

    034 Phil 334

  • G.R. No. 9984 March 23, 1916 - PETRONA JAVIER v. LAZARO OSMEÑA

    034 Phil 336

  • G.R. No. 10769 March 23, 1916 - RAYMUNDO MELLIZA v. F. W. TOWLE

    034 Phil 345

  • G.R. No. 11119 March 23, 1916 - JUANA RIVERA v. RICHARD CAMPBELL

    034 Phil 348

  • G.R. No. 8642 March 24, 1916 - STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF NEW YORK v. ANTONIO BABASA ET AL.

    034 Phil 354

  • G.R. Nos. 8765 & 10920 March 24, 1916 - PEDRO DIMAGIBA v. ANSELMO DIMAGIBA

    034 Phil 357

  • G.R. No. 8806 March 24, 1916 - ALEJANDRO BALDEMOR v. EUSEBIA MALANGYAON

    034 Phil 367

  • G.R. No. 9919 March 24, 1916 - ELISA TORRES DE VILLANUEVA v. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF NEW YORD ET AL.

    034 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. 9974 March 24, 1916 - CANG YUI v. HENRY GARDENER

    034 Phil 376

  • G.R. No. 10560 March 24, 1916 - IN RE: Tan Po Pic v. JUAN L. JAVIER

    034 Phil 382

  • G.R. No. 10624 March 24, 1916 - MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 385

  • G.R. No. 10663 March 24, 1916 - JOSEPH E. FOX v. MANILA ELECTRIC RAILROAD AND LIGHT COMPANY

    034 Phil 389

  • G.R. No. 11384 March 24, 1916 - ANTONIO GUEVARA v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 394

  • G.R. No. 10045 March 25, 1916 - PHIL. RAILWAY COMPANY v. WILLIAM T. NOLTING

    034 Phil 401

  • G.R. No. 10777 March 25, 1916 - ALEJANDRA v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF PANGASINAN

    034 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. 11157 March 25, 1916 - POLICARPIO RAMIREZ v. FRANCISCO DE OROZCO

    034 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. 10510 March 27, 1916 - LEONCIO ZARATE v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS ET AL.

    034 Phil 416

  • G.R. No. 10580 March 27, 1916 - TEODORO DE LOS REYES v. MAXIMINO PATERNO

    034 Phil 420

  • G.R. No. 11607 March 27, 1916 - PHIL. SUGAR ESTATES DEV. CO. (LTD.) v. ARMANDO CAMPS Y CAMPS

    034 Phil 426

  • G.R. No. 9845 March 28, 1916 - J. C. RUYMANN v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    034 Phil 428

  • G.R. No. 10054 March 28, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. ATANASIO CLARAVALL

    034 Phil 441

  • G.R. No. 10264 March 28, 1916 - CHOA TEK HEE v. PHIL. PUBLISHING CO.

    034 Phil 447

  • G.R. No. 10595 March 28, 1916 - TEODORO KALAMBAKAL v. VICENTE PAMATMAT ET AL.

    034 Phil 465

  • G.R. No. 10810 March 28, 1916 - MUNICIPALITY OF AGOO v. GABRIEL TAVORA

    034 Phil 475

  • G.R. No. 10902 March 28, 1916 - SERAPIA DE JESUS v. PABLO PALMA

    034 Phil 483

  • G.R. No. 11156 March 28, 1916 - IN RE: DU TEC CHUAN. M. G. VELOSO

    034 Phil 488

  • G.R. No. 11363 March 28, 1916 - BERNARDO MOLDEN v. INSULAR COLLETOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 493

  • G.R. No. 11366 March 28, 1916 - INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS v. GOERGE R. HARVEY

    034 Phil 503

  • G.R. No. 9550 March 29, 1916 - BACHRACH GARAGE v. HOTCHKISS & CO.

    034 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. 10019 March 29, 1916 - THOMAS A. WALLACE v. PUJALTE & CO.

    034 Phil 511

  • G.R. No. 10202 March 29, 1916 - GOV’T. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS Ex Rel. MUN. OF CARDONA v. MUN. OF BINANGONAN ET AL.

    034 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. 10474 March 29, 1916 - FRANCISCO OSORIO Y GARCIA v. SOLEDAD OSORIO

    034 Phil 522

  • G.R. No. 10493 March 29, 1916 - FREDERICK L. COHEN v. BENGUET COMMERCIAL CO. (Ltd.)

    034 Phil 526

  • G.R. No. 10751 March 29, 1916 - GOV’T. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. MARIA CABALLERO Y APARICI

    034 Phil 540

  • G.R. No. 10778 March 29, 1916 - MUNICIPALITY OF DUMANGAS v. ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF JARO

    034 Phil 541

  • G.R. No. 11008 March 29, 1916 - MARIANO REAL ET AL. v. CESAREO MALLARI

    034 Phil 547

  • G.R. No. 11068 March 29, 1916 - FERNANDEZ HERMANOS v. HAROLD M. PITT

    034 Phil 549

  • G.R. No. 11274 March 29, 1916 - RAFAELA DALMACIO v. ALBERTO BARRETTO

    034 Phil 554

  • G.R. No. 11585 March 29, 1916 - PABLO PERLAS v. PEDRO CONCEPCION

    034 Phil 559

  • G.R. No. 8697 March 30, 1916 - M. GOLDSTEIN v. ALIJANDRO ROCES ET AL.

    034 Phil 562

  • G.R. No. 8988 March 30, 1916 - HARTFORD BEAUMONT v. MAURO PRIETO, ET AL.

    041 Phil 670

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. 8135  March 13, 1916 - FRED J. LEGARE ET AL. v. ANTONIA CUERQUES<br /><br />034 Phil 221

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    SECOND DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 8135. March 13, 1916. ]

    FRED J. LEGARE ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. ANTONIA CUERQUES, Defendant-Appellant.

    Jose Martinez San Agustin for Appellant.

    Martin M. Levering for Appellees.

    SYLLABUS


    1. NATURAL CHILDREN; PATRIA POTESTAD; NATURAL FILIATION. — Paternal authority over a natural child is not acquired until after he has been legally recognized. Natural filiation cannot be determined except by an action at law, and without such an action a person cannot be supposed to be the natural father of another on a mere supposition that rests on the sole statement of such person that he assumes the right of paternal authority over, (patria potestad) and custody of the alleged natural child.

    2. ID.; ID. — When the alleged natural child is a minor and lives under the parental authority of his mother, who exercises it as an acquired right, no other person can acquire or exercise such authority until it has been extinguished or until she who has acquired and is exercising it has been deprived thereof. As a general rule, no man may with impunity be heard to call himself the father of a child whose mother is known, and still less may he attempt to exercise paternal authority over the child, forcibly removing him from the affection and attributes with which nature has endowed the mother, because such an act might imply criminal arrogance in some cases, and in others, even an affront to a mother’s dignity.


    D E C I S I O N


    ARELLANO, C.J. :


    These proceedings relate to the civil status of a boy and a girl, both unquestionably the children of Antonia Cuerques, a resident of Iligan, district of Lanao, Moro Province. The girl is named Caridad Cuerques and under this name she was registered in the civil register of births kept by said municipality of Iligan as having been born on September 24, 1902, and in the church baptismal register of the parish of Iligan, as born on the date just mentioned "at half past two in the afternoon, to whom," says the parish priest, "I gave the name of Caridad Cuerques, she being a natural daughter of Antonia Cuerques, a native of Agusan, Province of Misamis and a resident of this pueblo (Iligan)." The boy Federico Cuerques, according to the church register, was baptized on December 31, 1904, "born on the 23d of the same month of the same year, at seven o’clock in the evening, to whom," says the parish priest, "I gave the name of Federico Cuerques, he being a natural son of Antonia Cuerques, a resident of this pueblo," while in the civil register his birth was entered as of December 31, 1904, the date of his baptism, not his birth.

    In the two certificates issued by the secretary of the municipality of Iligan, relative to the birth of these two children, this official says:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "I further certify that no memorandum whatever appears in said book of any acknowledgment made by the father of said girl (of said boy) or by any other person whomsoever, in accordance with the Civil Code."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Both certificates were issued in March, 1910.

    Prior to this date, in 1902, the then secretary of the municipality of Iligan, issued a certificate of the following tenor, under date of October 21, 1902:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "I certify that, in accordance with the civil register of births kept i this office under my charge, there appears, on the back of page 1 thereof, an entry, made on the twenty-fourth day of last September, of the birth of a girl, Caridad Legare, a natural daughter of Mr. Fred J. Legare and Antonia Cuerques . . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Under date of March 5, 1906, F. J. Legare executed two instruments before a witness, Eugenio Perez, and a notary, i which he recognized as his natural children Caridad Cuerques and Federico Eduardo Cuerques, born, respectively, on September 24, 1902, and December 23, 1904.

    And on February 16, 1910, Fred J. Legare filed a petition with the Court of First Instance of Cebu, in which he requested that "judgment be rendered in this case by decreeing that Caridad Legare and Federico Cuerques Legare are natural children of and duly recognized by the plaintiff, Fred J. Legare, and that the court declare the plaintiff Fred J. Legare to be entitled to the custody of and to retain the said two minors, and that it order the defendant Antonia Cuerques to deliver the bodies of said Caridad Legare and Federico Cuerques Legare to the plaintiff Fred J. Legare, and to pay the costs of the suit."cralaw virtua1aw library

    On April 6, 1910, Fred J. Legare petitioned the court to appoint him guardian ad litem of the minor plaintiffs Caridad Legare and Federico Eduardo Cuerques Legare, which it did.

    The grounds of the complaint are: That Legare legally recognized said two children; that record of the recognition of the girl Caridad was entered in the civil register of births of the municipality of Iligan, and of the boy Federico, in a public instrument executed before a notary; that said children were minors and their mother Antonia Cuerques refused to deliver them to Legare; and that Legare is qualified to exercise paternal authority (patria potestad) and has the means to support said children.

    Although Antonia Cuerques was unable to answer the complaint as no notification whatever was served on her of the ruling on her demurrer (she was in Iligan Province, the place of her domicile, and the trial was held in Cebu), the court, on July 12, 1910, rendered judgment ordering defendant to deliver to plaintiff, Fred J. Legare, the two children Caridad and Federico, finding that these latter were in the custody of their mother; that said mother Antonia Cuerques, by reason of her way of living, was not a fit person to have the custody of her children, and that the plaintiff Legare was a fit person to have said custody.

    On April 23, 1911, Antonia Cuerques requested from the court information of the status of the case, and was told in reply that in September, 1910, the sheriff of the Moro Province had been notified of the judgment.

    Legare’s own attorney and that of Antonia Cuerques, having come to agreement, moved the court to revoke the order of default and of the aforementioned judgment, and the court, by an order of May 20, 1911, duly set aside said order and judgment.

    After the hearing, judgment was rendered, ordering Antonia Cuerques and any other person who might take over the custody of said minors from Antonia Cuerques, to deliver the said minors to the plaintiff Fred J. Legare, in order that he might support and educate said natural children, and he was warned by the court that, if he failed to do so, they would be taken out of his control by means of proper judicial proceedings.

    Defendant excepted to the judgment, moved for a new trial and, her motion being overruled, also excepted thereto.

    The trial court based his judgment on the grounds that the children Caridad and Federico Cuerques were natural children of the plaintiff Fred J. Legare and of the defendant Antonia Cuerques, both single and free to marry, and that such natural children had a right to demand of their father all the consideration allowed by law in behalf of recognized children, wherefore Legare desired to place them in school for their maintenance and education; as to the law on the subject he cited article 154 of the Civil Code.

    Plaintiff recognizes and admits that Caridad and Federico Cuerques are natural children of Antonia Cuerques. The court, in his two judgments, also recognizes them as such. Both plaintiff and the court recognize that the children were under the custody and control of the mother. She has exercised her parental authority over them since the time they were born, for the mother is always certainly known, the birth and identity of the child being common knowledge, and, in the present case, known to both the plaintiff and the court. Antonia Cuerques had them under her custody by natural right and substantive law.

    Both her parental authority and her custody of her children were acquired rights. For the purpose of depriving Antonia Cuerques of her right of parental authority and of that of the custody of her natural children, no fact or reason whatever was alleged and proven to show why her parental authority should terminate. She has not died, nor has either of her children; neither of these latter has been emancipated or adopted; the mother has not contracted a second marriage, nor has she been deprived of her parental authority, either by any final judgment in a criminal action or by final judgment in divorce proceedings (Civil Code, arts. 167, 168, and 169). So that neither the complaint nor the judgment rests on any basis of fact. In the first judgment, which was set aside, the court expressed the opinion that "Antonia Cuerques, by reason of her way of living is not a fit person to have the custody of her children;" but this statement of the court was not supported by any reason shown in the record; no evidence whatever was introduced in regard to this particular, unless it be some private and confidential assertion by plaintiff. If, by reason of her way of living, the mother had become unworthy to exercise her parental authority, an action should have been brought for the purpose of depriving her of her said right, but it should not have been taken away from her without due process of law.

    "The courts may deprive the parents of the parental authority or suspend the exercise thereof when they treat their children with excessive cruelty, or if they give them corrupting orders, advice, or examples." (Art. 171, Civil Code.)

    None of these causes was alleged and proven in this case.

    Plaintiff alleged something in his complaint that is not true, to wit, that he had acknowledged his daughter Caridad Legare in the civil register of births of the municipality of Iligan. A municipal secretary of Iligan, named Mariano Fuentecilla, duly certified as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "I certify that, as recorded in the civil register of births kept in this office under my charge, there appears on the back of page 1 thereof an entry of birth on the 24th day of last September of a girl Caridad Legare, the natural daughter of Mr. Fred J. Legare and Antonia Cuerques . . . . And in order that this certificate may be effective, I issue the same under the attestation of the municipal president. I certify to the foregoing in Iligan, this 21st day of October, 1902."cralaw virtua1aw library

    This document was presented by plaintiff; but the municipal secretary of Iligan, Patricio Arias, on March 26, 1910, certified:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "That in the register of births of this municipality of Iligan, for the years 1902-1903, on page 2, line 9, there is written the name of Caridad Cuerques, daughter of Antonia Cuerques, born on September 24, 1902; and I further certify that no memorandum whatever appears in said register of any acknowledgment made in accordance with the Civil Code, by the father of said girl or by any other person whatever."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Plaintiff wished to recognize this same girl Caridad and her brother Federico Cuerques as his natural children before a witness, Eugenio Perez, and a notary whose signature is illegible; but the law is explicit on this point: "When the acknowledgment of the minor is not made in the record of birth or in a will, judicial approval, with a hearing of the department of public prosecution, shall be required." (Civil Code, art. 133, par. 2.) Consequently, an act before a notary is not sufficient; there must be a judicial proceeding.

    A natural child, being a minor, may be acknowledged by conferring a benefit upon him, without prejudice to an acquired right; but when the minor is under the parental authority of his mother who at the time exercises it as an acquired right, then, until it is extinguished or until she who has acquired and exercises it has been deprived thereof, no other person may acquire or exercise the same; and the manner of its cancellation and deprivation has been set forth hereinabove. No man may be allowed with impunity to call himself the natural father of a child whose mother is known, and still less may he attempt to exercise his paternal authority over the child by forcibly removing it from the affection and attributes with which nature has endowed the mother, because, in some cases, such an act might imply criminal arrogance, and in others, a base affront to a mother’s dignity. When the mother is unworthy to continue in the exercise of her acquired right, there is no other remedy than the action provided by law.

    There is no proof whatever that plaintiff is what he claims to be, the natural father of the children in question.

    The judgment appealed from is reversed, without special finding as to costs. So ordered.

    Torres, Johnson, Trent and Araullo, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. 8135  March 13, 1916 - FRED J. LEGARE ET AL. v. ANTONIA CUERQUES<br /><br />034 Phil 221




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED