Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1903 > May 1903 Decisions > G.R. No. 1072 May 6, 1903 - MANUEL ABELLO v. SEÑORA PAZ KOCK DE MONASTERIO

002 Phil 188:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 1072. May 6, 1903. ]

MANUEL ABELLO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEÑORA PAZ KOCK DE MONASTERIO, Defendant-Appellee.

Felipe G. Calderon for Appellant.

P. Q. Rothrock for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS; APPEAL BOND; SETTLEMENT OF ADMINISTRATOR’S ACCOUNT. — The law does not fix the time for filing a bond on appeal from an order settling an administrator’s account, and where the lower court has not done so the appeal will not be dismissed, but an order will be made by the Supreme Court allowing time for the filing thereof.


D E C I S I O N


LADD, J. :


August 8, 1902, the Court of First Instance of Occidental Negros made an order disallow ing the will of Señora Josefa Montilla y Ianson, which had been presented to it for probate by the person named therein as executor. August 12, 1902, an application for an appeal was duly filed in that court under section 781 of the Code of Civil Procedure. August 16, 1902, the appeal was admitted by the court, and it was ordered that a certified copy of the record should be transmitted to this court, which was done November 1, 1902. In the order admitting the appeal and directing the transmission of the copy of the record to this court, nothing was said with reference to the filing of an appeal bond by the appellant, and none has been filed. The appellee moves that the appeal be dismissed for failure to file such bond.

We have held that a person appealing from the settlement of an administrator’s account under section 781 does not lose his right to prosecute the appeal by failure to file a bond within twenty-one days from the entry of the order, no time for the filing of the bond having been fixed by the court from which the appeal was taken. (Hernaez v. Norris, decided March 31, 1903. 1) In that case the court below had refused to admit the appeal by reason of the failure to file the bond within twenty-one days, and upon a petition for a mindless to the judge directing him to admit the appeal, we made an order fixing a period within which the party might file the bond and thus perfect the appeal. The present case is governed by identical considerations, and justice will be done all parties interested by a similar disposition.

It is ordered that the appellant, within forty days from notification of this decision, file in the court below a bond conditioned as provided in sections 780 and 781 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in an amount and with sureties to the satisfaction of said court. Upon failure to comply with this order the appeal will be dismissed. So ordered.

Torres, Cooper, Willard, Mapa and McDonough, JJ., concur.

Arellano, C.J., did not sit in this case.

Endnotes:



1. Page 83, supra.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






May-1903 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 1096 May 5, 1903 - MARTIN BALATBAT v. VALENTIN TANJUTCO

    002 Phil 182

  • G.R. No. 1292 May 5, 1903 - MARCELINO DE LA CRUZ v. GEO N. WOLFE

    002 Phil 184

  • G.R. No. 1072 May 6, 1903 - MANUEL ABELLO v. SEÑORA PAZ KOCK DE MONASTERIO

    002 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. 1102 May 6, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE TENGCO

    002 Phil 189

  • G.R. No. 1234 May 6, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. E. S. LEWIS

    002 Phil 193

  • G.R. No. 1053 May 7, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. MAMERTO VARGAS, ET AL.

    002 Phil 194

  • G.R. No. 1014 May 9, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL REPOLLO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 195

  • G.R. No. 1076 May 9, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JACINTO MARTINEZ, ET AL.

    002 Phil 199

  • G.R. No. 49 May 11, 1903 - MUN. OF ANTIPOLO v. COMMUNITY OF CAINTA

    002 Phil 204

  • G.R. No. 1011 May 13, 1903 - JOSE MACHUCA v. CHUIDIAN

    002 Phil 210

  • G.R. No. 1055 May 13, 1903 - JOSE ACUÑA v. MUN. OF THE CITY OF ILOILO

    002 Phil 217

  • G.R. No. 1227 May 13, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. HOWARD D. TERRELL

    002 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. 1015 May 14, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. CANDIDO REPOLLO, ET AL.

    002 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. 1189 May 14, 1903 - ALEJANDRO BAUTISTA v. HON. ELIAS F. JOHNSON

    002 Phil 230

  • G.R. No. 1336 May 14, 1903 - GABRIELA ALIÑO, ET AL. v. IGNACIO VILLAMOR

    002 Phil 234

  • G.R. No. 38 May 15, 1903 - PASTELLS & REGORDOSA v. HOLLMAN & CO.

    002 Phil 235

  • G.R. No. 1043 May 15, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JULIAN ATIENZA

    002 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. 1044 May 15, 1903 - PEDRO JULIA v. VICENTE SOTTO

    002 Phil 247

  • G.R. No. 1109 May 15, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE M. LERMA

    002 Phil 254

  • G.R. No. 1203 May 15, 1903 - IN RE: HOWARD D. TERRELL

    002 Phil 266

  • G.R. No. 1007 May 16, 1903 - PAULINO REYES v. HON. FELIX M. ROXAS

    002 Phil 268

  • G.R. No. 1049 May 16, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. FRED L. DORR, ET AL.

    002 Phil 269

  • G.R. No. 1056 May 16, 1903 - AGUEDA BENEDICTO v. ESTEBAN LA RAMA

    002 Phil 293

  • G.R. No. 1111 May 16, 1903 - FELICIDAD GARCIA DE LARA v. JOSE GONZALEZ DE LARA, ET AL.

    002 Phil 294

  • G.R. No 1085 May 16, 1903 - RUDOLPH WAHL, ET AL. v. DONALDSON, SIMS & CO.

    002 Phil 301

  • G.R. No. 39 May 19, 1903 - TUASON & SAN PEDRO v. GAVINA ZAMORA & SONS

    002 Phil 305

  • G.R. No. 967 May 19, 1903 - DARIO AND GAUDENCIO ELEIZEGUI v. MANILA LAWN TENNIS CLUB

    002 Phil 309

  • G.R. No. 997 May 19, 1903 - MARIA UBALDO v. LAO-JIANQUIAO

    002 Phil 319

  • G.R. No. 1027 May 19, 1903 - RAMON DEL ROSARIO v. CLEMENTE DEL ROSARIO

    002 Phil 321

  • G.R. No. 1051 May 19, 1903 - UNITED STATES v. FRED L. DORR, ET AL.

    002 Phil 332