Third Issue Yes we can perceive no valid reason for holding that within the

Third issue yes we can perceive no valid reason for

This preview shows page 8 - 9 out of 33 pages.

of having rights and duties", as for instance, the estate of a bankrupt or deceased person. Third Issue Yes, we can perceive no valid reason for holding that within the intent of the constitution (Article IV), its provisions on Philippine citizenship exclude the legal principle of extension above adverted to. If for reasons already stated our law indulges the fiction of extension of personality, if for such reasons the estate of Pedro O. Fragrante should be considered an artificial or juridical person herein, we can find no justification for refusing to declare a like fiction as to the extension of his citizenship for the purposes of this proceeding. Conclusion: Pedro O. Fragrante was a Filipino citizen, and as such, if he had lived, in view of the evidence of record, he would have obtained from the commission the certificate for which he was applying. The situation has suffered but one change, and that is, his death. His estate was that of a Filipino citizen. And its economic ability to appropriately and adequately operate and maintain the service of an ice plant was the same that it received from the decedent himself. In the absence of a contrary showing, which does not exist here, his heirs may be assumed to be also Filipino citizens; and if they are not, there is the simple expedient of revoking the certificate or enjoining them from inheriting it. Upon the whole, we are of the opinion that for the purposes of the prosecution of said case No. 4572 of the Public Service Commission to its final conclusion, both the personality and citizenship of Pedro O. Fragrante must be deemed extended, within the meaning and intent of the Public Service Act, as amended, in harmony with the constitution: it is so adjudged and decreed. Case 9 VIRGINIA GARCIA FULE vs. CA G.R. No. L-40502 and G.R. No. L-42670 November 29, 1976 The two interrelated cases bring to the Supreme Court the question of what the word "resides" in Section 1, Rule 73 of the Revised Rules Of Court, referring to the situs of the settlement of the estate of deceased persons, means. Additionally, the rule in the appointment of a special administrator is sought to be reviewed. Facts: On April 26, 1973, Amado G. Garcia died intestate, leaving real estate and personal properties in Calamba, Laguna. On May 2, 1973, Virginia G. Fule, a creditor of the estate of Amado G. Garcia as well as an illegitimate sister of the latter, filed with the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Laguna, a petition for letters of administration. At the same time, she moved ex parte for her appointment as special administratrix over the estate. A motion for reconsideration was filed by Preciosa B. Garcia, surviving spouse of the deceased, on May 8, 1973, contending that the order appointing Virginia G. Fule as special administratrix was issued without jurisdiction. She prayed that she be appointed special administratrix of the estate, in lieu of Virginia G. Fule, and as regular administratrix after due hearing.
Image of page 8
Image of page 9

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 33 pages?

  • Winter '15

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture