8/9/2019 City of Manila vs Archbishop

1/1

. No. L-10033 August 30, 1917 

E CITY OF MANILA, petitioner-appellant,

E ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF MANILA and THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR THE ESTATE OF MARIA CONCEPCION

RMIENTO, interveners-appellees.

Attorney Escaler for appellant.

liam A. Kincaid and Thomas L. Hartigan for the appellee Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila.

appearance for the other appellee. 

HNSON, J.: 

s action was commenced in the Court of First Instance of the city of Manila on the 15th day of February, 1913. Its purpose was to have dec

heated to the city of Manila certain property situated in and around said city; that said property consists of five parcels of land located ion

ricts of Malate and Paco of the city of Manila, as shown in a plan, in the office of the Department of Engineering and Public Works of said cnila, No. B-10-27. The theory of the plaintiff is that one Ana Sarmiento was the owner of said property and died in the year 1668 without l

r or person entitled to the same."

er hearing the evidence, the Honorable A. S. Crossfield, in a carefully prepared opinion, reached the conclusion that the prayer of the plain

uld be denied without any finding as to costs. From that conclusion the plaintiff appealed to this court and made a number of assignmentor.

er an examination of the evidence adduced during the trial of the cause, we find that the following facts were proved by a large preponder

evidence: That Ana Sarmiento resided, with her husband, in the city of Manila sometime prior to the 17th day of November, 1668; that on

e she made a will; that on the 23d day of November, 1668, she added a codicil to said will, that on the 19th day of May, 1669, she made anmaking a part thereof the said codicil of November 23d, 1668; that said will contained provisions for the establishment of a "Capellania d

as;" that the first chaplain of said capellania should be her nephew Pedro del Castillo; that said will contained a provision for the administ

aid property in relation with the said "Capellania de Misas" succeeding administration should continue perpetually ; that said Ana Sarmien

ut the year 1672; that for more than two hundred years the intervener, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila, through his various ag

administered said property; that the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila has rightfully and legally succeeded in accordance with the te

provisions of the will of Ana Sarmiento.

tion 750 of Act No. 190 provides when property may be declared escheated. It provides, "when a person dies intestate, seized of real or p

perty . . . leaving no heir or person by law entitled to the same," that then and in that case such property under the procedure provided fotions 751 and 752, may de declared escheated.

proof shows that Ana Sarmiento did not die intestate. She left a will. The will provides for the administration of said property by her nep

l as for the subsequent administration of the same. She did not die without an heir nor without persons entitled to administer her estate. her shows that she did not die without leaving a person by law entitled to inherit her property. In view of the facts, therefore, the properstion cannot be declared escheated as of the property of Ana Sarmiento. If by any chance the property may be declared esch eated, it mus

ed upon the fact that persons subsequent to Ana Sarmiento died intestate without leaving heir or person by law entitled to the same.

will clearly, definitely and unequivocally defines and designates what disposition shall be made of the property in quest ion. The heirntioned in said will evidently accepted its terms and permitted the property to be administered in accordance therewith. And, so far as th

ord shows, it is still being administered in accordance with the terms of said will for the benefit of the real beneficiary as was intended by

ginal owner.

record fully and completely shows that the theory of the plaintiff is without foundation either in fact or in law.

judgment of the lower court is, therefore, hereby affirmed, with costs in this instance. So ordered.