SUCCESSION: COURSE SYLLABUS

ATTY. ALVIN T. CLARIDADES

Professor, UDM College of Law
2nd Semester, AY 2018-2019
INTRODUCTION
 ETYMOLOGY OF “SUCCESSION”
 STATUTORY DEFINITION OF SUCCESSION
 SUCCESSION AS A MODE OF ACQUISITION
 ORIGINAL AND DERIVATIVE CLASSES OF ACQUIRING OWNERSHIP
 ELEMENTS OF SUCCESSION
 REQUISITES OF SUCCESSION
 HEIR
 KINDS OF HEIRS
 WHEN SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS ARE VESTED
1. Bondad v. Bondad, GR L-8092, Mar. 14, 1916, 34 Phil. 232
 LAW THAT GOVERNS DISTRIBUTION OF ESTATE
 HEIRS SUCCEED NOT ONLY TO THE RIGHTS OF THE DECEASED BUT ALSO TO HIS
OBLIGATIONS; EXCEPTION
o Heirs succeed not only to the rights of the deceased but also to his obligations
2. Estate of Hemady v. Luzon Surety Co., Inc., GR L-8437, 100 Phil. 388,
Nov. 28, 1956
o Exception
3. Ledesma v. McLachlin, GR L-44837, Nov. 23, 1938, 66 Phil. 547
CHAPTER I: GENERAL PROVISIONS ON SUCCESSION
 SUCCESSION; DEFINITION
 “DECEDENT” AND “TESTATOR”
 INHERITANCE
o Heirs subrogated to the rights and obligations of the decedent
4. Barrios v. Dolor, GR 559, Mar. 14, 1903, 2 Phil. 44
o Debts of deceased must first be paid before his heirs can inherit
5. Ortiga Brothers and Co. v. Enage, GR L-6228, Jan. 30, 1911, 18 Phil. 345
o Binding effect of contracts upon heirs of deceased party
6. Estate of Hemady v. Luzon Surety Co., Inc., GR L-8437, Nov. 28, 1956,
100 Phil. 388
 RIGHTS TO THE SUCCESSION; WHEN VESTED
o Vesture of successional rights
7. Bonilla v. Barcena, GR L-41715, June 18, 1976, 163 Phil. 516
o Vested rights to succession not impaired by new law
8. Uson v. Del Rosario, GR L-4963, Jan. 29, 1953, 92 Phil. 530
o Right of heir to dispose of share accrues upon decedent’s death
o Heir may sell hereditary rights to co-heir
9. De Borja v. Vda. De Borja, GR L-28040,, Aug. 18, 1972, 46 SCRA 577
o Value of inheritance reckoned as of time of death of decedent
10. Dizon-Rivera v. Dizon, GR L-24561, June 30, 1970, 33 SCRA 554
o Declaration of heirship not needed to establish right to inheritance
11. Baun v. Heirs of Baun, GR 30750, Oct. 24, 1929, 53 Phil. 654
12. Ibarle v. Po, GR L-5064, Feb. 27, 1953, 92 Phil. 721
13. Morales v. Yañez, GR L-9315, Mar. 24, 1956, 98 Phil. 677
o Action to quiet title survives the death of decedent
14. Bonilla v. Barcena, GR L-41715, June 18, 1976, 71 SCRA 491
o Heirs generally bound by contracts entered into by predecessors
15. DKC Holdings Corp. v. CA, GR 118248, Apr. 5, 2000, 329 SCRA 666
o Right of heir to sell right in property under administration
16. Acebedo v. Abesamis, GR 102380, Jan. 18, 1993, 217 SCRA 186
 17. Aggabao v. RTC of Quezon City Branch 85, GR 146006, Feb. 23, 2004,
423 SCRA 497
o Court approval of sale of heir’s interest in the estate required
18. Liu v. Loy, Jr., GR 145982, July 3, 2003, 405 SCRA 316
o Sale during probate subject to the outcome of the proceedings
19. Opulencia v. CA, GR 125835, July 30, 1998, 355 Phil. 124
o Sale by administrator sans court’s approval deemed invalid
20. Dillena v. CA, GR L-77660, July 28, 1988, 163 SCRA 630
21. Manotok Realty, Inc. v. CA, GR L-35367, Apr. 9, 1987, 149 SCRA 174
o Sale of estate property with probate court authority divests court of
jurisdiction to authorize second sale
22. Dolar v. Sundiam, GR L-27631, Apr. 30, 1971, 148 Phil. 630
o Action for partition mere exercise of right pertaining to decedent
23. Heirs of Conti v. CA, GR 118464, Dec. 21, 1998, 300 SCRA 345
o Declaration of heirship must be made in special proceedings
24. Litam v. Rivera, GR L-7644, Nov. 27, 1956, 100 Phil. 364
25. Heirs of Yaptinchay v. Del Rosario, GR 124320, March 2, 1999, 304
SCRA 18
 KINDS OF SUCCESSION
 TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION
o Definition
26. Ong Ham v. Saavedra, GR L-27531, Dec. 24, 1927, 51 Phil. 267
 MIXED SUCCESSION
o Definition
27. Macrohon Ong Ham vs. Saavedra, GR L-27531, Dec. 24, 1927, 51 Phil.
267
 WHAT THE INHERITANCE COMPRISES AND EXCLUDES
o Future inheritance
28. Blas v. Santos, GR L-14070, Mar. 29, 1961, 111 Phil. 503
o Transfer to heir of duties and rights
29. Tuason, Jr. v. Lingad, GR L-24248, July 31, 1974, 58 SCRA 170
o Right of redemption transmissible to heirs
30. Rupa, Sr. v. CA, GR 80129, Jan. 25, 2000, 323 SCRA 153
 KINDS OF SUCCESSORS; HEIR, DEVISEE AND LEGATEE
CHAPTER II: TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION
 WILL; DEFINITION
o Wills as species of conveyance
31. Riera v. Palmaroli, GR 14851, Sept. 13, 1919, 40 Phil. 105
o Will as an intent to dispose mortis causa
32. Seangio v. Reyes, GR 140371-72, Nov. 27, 2006, 508 SCRA 177
 WILL-MAKING A STRICTLY PERSONAL ACT
 NON-DELEGABLE COMPONENTS OF A WILL
 PROVISIONS IN A WILL THAT CAN BE ENTRUSTED TO A THIRD PERSON
 EFFICACY OF A WILL CANNOT BE LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF ANOTHER PERSON
33. Dizon-Rivera v. Dizon, GR L-24561, June 30, 1970, 33 SCRA 554
 CONSTRUCTION THAT WILL GIVE EFFECT TO A DISPOSITION FAVORED
34. Benedicto v. Javellana, GR 3751, Feb. 21, 1908, 10 Phil. 197
o Court could vary the language of the will to give it effect
35. Solla v. Ascueta, GR 24955, Sept. 4, 1926, 49 Phil. 333
 TESTATOR'S INTENTION TO BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE WORDS OF THE WILL
 ORDINARY AND TECHNICAL WORDS IN A WILL; HOW CONSTRUED
o Execution of a will to be settled pursuant to testator’s intention
36. In re Estate of Calderon, GR 7856, Dec. 26, 1913, 26 Phil., 233
 PREFERENCE TO BE ACCORDED TO EXPRESSIONS GIVING EFFECT TO A WILL
 PARTIAL VALIDITY AND INVALIDITY OF A WILL
37. Balanay, Jr. v. Martinez, GR L-39247, June 27, 1975, 64 SCRA 452
 STATUS OF AFTER-ACQUIRED PROPERTY
 REVISE OR LEGACY TO COVER ALL INTEREST OF TESTATOR
 LAW GOVERNING FORM OF WILLS
38. In re will of Riosa, GR 14074, Nov. 7, 1918, 39 Phil. 23
o Validity of will to be judged by the law at the time of its making
39. Enriquez v. Abadia, GR L-7188, Aug. 9, 1954, 39 Phil. 23
 TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY; GENERALLY PRESUMED
40. Bugnao v. Ubag, GR 4445, Sept. 18, 1909, 14 SCRA 163
 MINORS INCAPACITATED TO MAKE A WILL
 TESTATOR MUST BE OF SOUND MIND AT THE TIME OF EXECUTION OF WILL
 WHAT CONSTITUTES A SOUND MIND
41. Alsua-Betts v. CA, GR L-46430-31, July 30, 1979, 92 SCRA 332
o General presumption of sanity and burden of proving the contrary
42. People v. Cruz, GR L-13219-20, Aug. 31, 1960, 109 Phil. 288
 REVERSE PRESUMPTION
 EFFECTS OF SUPERVENING CAPACITY AND INCAPACITY
MARRIED WOMAN MAY MAKE A WILL WITHOUT HUSBAND’S CONSENT AND COURT
AUTHORITY
 MARRIED WOMAN MAY DISPOSE OF BY WILL HER SEPARATE AND CONJUGAL
PROPERTY
 REQUIREMENTS COMMON TO WILLS
 NOTARIAL WILL
o Attestation Clause
43. Tenefrancia v. Abaja, GR L-2415, July 31, 1950, 87 Phil. 139
44. Vda. de Ramos v. CA, GR L-40804, Jan. 31, 1978, 81 SCRA 393
o Purpose of attestation clause
45. Leynez v. Leynez, GR L-46097, Oct. 18, 1939, 68 Phil. 745
o Purpose of requiring the numbering of pages
46. Abangan v. Abangan, GR 13431, Nov. 12, 1919, 40 Phil. 476
o Precision of language in drafting attestation clause not imperative.
47. Testate Estate of the Late Alipio Abada v. Abaja, GR 147145, Jan. 31,
2005, 450 SCRA 264
o Number of sheets or pages used; failure to state deemed fatal
48. In re Will of Andrada, GR 16008, 42 Phil. 180, Sept. 29, 1921
o Number of pages; purpose of stating it in the attestation clause
49. In The Matter of the Estate of Saguinsin, GR 15025, 41 Phil. 875, Mar.
15, 1920
o Signatures of witnesses at bottom of attestation clause mandatory
50. Cargo v. Cargo, GR L-5826, Apr. 29, 1953, 92 Phil. 1032
o Subscription of signatures of testator and attesting witnesses
51. Gonzales v. Gonzales de Carungcong, GR L–3272-73, Nov. 29, 1951, 90
Phil. 444
52. Echavarria v. Sarmiento, GR 45260, Nov. 28, 1938, 66 Phil. 611
o Attestation clause pertains only to witnesses
53. Cargo v. Cargo, GR L-5826, 92 Phil. 1032, Apr. 29, 1953).
o Subscription
54. Taboada v. Rosal, GR L-36033, Nov, 5, 1982, 118 SCRA 195
o Test of presence of testator and witnesses
55. Jaboneta v. Gustilo, GR 1641, Jan. 19, 1906, 5 Phil 541).
56. Nera v. Rimando, GR 5971, Feb. 27, 1911, 18 Phil. 450
o Subscription on various periods not permitted by law
57. Andalis v. Pulgueras, GR 39209, Mar. 10, 1934, 59 Phil. 643
o Signatures of testator and witnesses appearing in right margin
58. Avera v. Garcia and Rodriguez, GR 15566, Sept. 14, 1921, 42 Phil. 145
o Use of thumbprint or other mark allowed
59. De Gala v. Gonzales and Ona, 53 Phil. 108; 28 R.C.L., 117
o Inadvertent failure of witness to affix signature to a page not fatal
 60. Icasiano v. Icasiano, GR L-18979, June 30, 1964, 11 SCRA 422
o Signing by another op testator’s name at latter’s direction
61. Garcia v. Lacuesta, GR L-4067, Nov. 29, 1951, 90 Phil. 489
o Third person requested by testator to write his name need not sign will
himself
62. Barut v. Cabacungan, GR 6285, Feb. 15, 1912, 21 Phil. 461
o Will subscribed at the end by some person other than the testator,
insufficient compliance with the law
63. Balonan v. Abellana, GR L-15153, Aug. 31, 1960, 109 Phil. 359
o Position of testator and witnesses when will is subscribed
64. Nera v. Rimando, GR 5971, Feb. 27, 1911, 18 Phil. 450
o Primary purpose of pagination requirement
65. Martir v. Martir, GR 46995, June 21, 1940, 70 Phil. 89
o Use of Arabic numerals in lieu of letters allowed
66. Unson v. Abella, GR 17857, June 12, 1922, 43 Phil. 494
 FORMS OF WILLS
o Examples of defective notarial wills
67. Azuela v. CA, GR 122880, Apr. 12, 2006, 487 SCRA 119
 NOTARIAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF WILLS
o Purpose of acknowledgment
68. Protacio v. Mendoza, AC 5764, Jan. 13, 2003, 395 SCRA 10
o Certification of notary that testament was duly acknowledged is not part of
acknowledgment or testamentary act
69. Andalis v. Pulgueras, GR 39209, Mar. 10, 1934, 59 Phil. 643
o Acknowledgment and jurat distinguished
70. Tigno v. Aquino, GR 129416, Nov. 25, 2004, 444 SCRA 61
71. Gamido v. NBP Officials, Mar. 1, 1995, GR 114829, 242 SCRA 83
o Notary public cannot serve as witness at the same time
72. Cruz v. Villasor, GR L-32213, Nov. 26, 1973, 54 SCRA 31
 RULE IN CASE THE TESTATOR IS DEAF OR DEAF-MUTE
 RULE IN CASE THE TESTATOR IS BLIND; RATIONALE FOR THE RULE
o Article 808 applies also to those incapable of reading
73. Alvarado v. Gaviola, GR 74695, Sept. 14, 1993, 226 SCRA 347
 DEFECTS AND IMPERFECTIONS IN THE FORM OF ATTESTATION; DOCTRINE OF
LIBERAL INTERPRETATION
74. Lopez v. Lopez, GR 189964, Nov. 12, 2012, 685 SCRA 209
o Purpose of requiring attestation to state the number of pages used
75. Caneda v. CA, GR 103554, May 28, 1993, 222 SCRA 781
o Discrepancy in stated and actual number of pages
76. Testate Estate of the late Alipio Abada v. Abaja, GR 147145, Jan. 31,
2005, 450 SCRA 264
o Evidence aliunde not allowed to fill void or supply missing details
77. Gil v. Murciano, GR L-3362, Mar. 1, 1951, 88 Phil. 260
 HOLOGRAPHIC WILL; FORM
o Effect of failure to observe formalities
78. Sps. Ajero v. CA, GR 106720, Sept. 15, 1994, 236 SCRA 488
o Complete date requirement; exception
79. Velasco v. Lopez, GR 905, Feb. 12, 1903, 1 Phil. 720).
80. Roxas v. De Jesus, Jr., GR L-38338, Jan. 28, 1985, 134 SCRA 245).
 WITNESS/ES OR EXPERT ON THE HANDWRITING AND SIGNATURE OF TESTATOR
o 3-witness requirement not mandatory for holographic wills
81. Azaola v. Singson, GR L-14003, Aug. 5, 1960, 109 Phil. 102).
o Holographic will itself must be presented for probate; exception
82. Gan v. Yap, GR L-12190, Aug. 30, 1958, 104 Phil. 509
83. Rodelas v. Aranza, GR L-58509, Dec. 7, 1982, 119 SCRA 16
o Date in a holographic will to include the day, month and year of execution;
exception
 84. Roxas v. De Jesus, Jr., GR L-38338, Jan. 28, 1985, 134 SCRA 245
o Where to place the date of the holographic will
85. Labrador v. CA, GR L-83843-44, Apr. 5, 1990, 184 SCRA 170
 DISPOSITIONS BELOW TESTATOR’S SIGNATURE
o Only unsigned words erased, corrected are invalidated; exception
86. Velasco v. Lopez, GR 905, Feb. 12, 1903, 1 Phil. 720
87. Kalaw v. Relova, GR L-40207, Sept. 28, 1984
 SIGNED BUT UNDATED DISPOSITIONS; HOW VALIDATED; EFFECT
 AUTHENTICATING INSERTIONS, CANCELLATIONS, ERASURES OR ALTERATIONS
 WILL MADE BY A FILIPINO ABROAD MAY BE PROBATED IN THE PHILIPPINES
 EFFECT OF WILL MADE BY AN ALIEN WHO IS ABROAD
 EFFECT OF WILL MADE IN THE PHILIPPINES BY CITIZEN OF ANOTHER COUNTRY
 JOINT WILL PROHIBITED
88. Vda. de Perez v. Tolete, GR 76714, June 2, 1994, 232 SCRA 722
o Rationale for the prohibition especially between spouses
89. Dacanay v. Florendo, GR L-2071, Sept. 19, 1950, 87 Phil. 324
 JOINT WILLS EXECUTED BY FILIPINOS AND ALLOWED IN ANOTHER COUNTRY NOT
VALID HERE
 WITNESSES TO WILLS; QUALIFICATIONS
o Good reputation of witness presumed
90. Gonzales v. CA, GR L-37453, May 25, 1979, 90 SCRA 183
o Credibility as the other principal qualification of witness to a will
91. Vda. De Molo v. Tanchuco, GR L-8774, Nov. 26, 1956, 100 Phil. 344
o Relatives of testator or heirs not prohibited from being witnesses
92. Vda. De Roxas v. Roxas, GR L-2396, Dec. 11, 1950, 87 Phil. 692
o Competency of witness determined by law while his credibility rests upon
appreciation thereof by the court
93. Gonzales v. CA, GR L-37453, May 25, 1979, 90 SCRA 183
o Competency and credibility as a witness distinguished
94. Vda. de Aroyo v. El Beaterio del Santissimo Rosario de Molo, GR L-22005,
May 3, 1968, 23 SCRA 525
 COMPETENCY OF WITNESSES MUST BE PRESENT AT TIME OF ATTESTATION; THEIR
SUBSEQUENT INCOMPETENCY WILL NOT BAR PROBATE OF WILL
 WITNESS, HIS SPOUSE, PARENT, CHILD OR PERSON CLAIMING UNDER ANY OF THEM
CANNOT INHERIT
 CREDITORS OF A TESTATOR MAY BE COMPETENT WITNESSES TO HIS WILL
 CODICIL; DEFINITION
 FORMAL REQUISITES OF A CODICIL
 INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENT IN A WILL BY REFERENCE; REQUIREMENTS
 REVOCATION OF WILLS
 LAW THAT GOVERNS REVOCATION
 INSTANCES WHEN A WILL OR PART OF IT MAY BE REVOKED
o Physical act of destruction of will not suffice to revoke the same
95. Maloto v. CA, GR 76464, Feb. 29, 1988, 158 SCRA 451
o Doctrine of dependent relative revocation
96. Molo v. Molo, GR L-2538, Sept. 21, 1951, 90 Phil 37
97. Samson v. Naval, GR L-11823, Feb. 11, 1918, 41 Phil. 838
o When cancellation or destruction of a will may be presumed
98. Gago v. Mamuyac, GR L-26317, Jan. 29, 1927, 49 Phil. 902
o Effect of will torn by another without testator’s express direction
99. Lipana v. CFI of Cavite, GR 47174, June 28, 1940, 70 Phil. 365
 IMPLIED PARTIAL REVOCATION
 DOCTRINE OF ABSOLUTE REVOCATION
 REVOCATION BY MISTAKE
 EFFECT OF REVOCATION OF WILL ON RECOGNITION OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILD
 REPUBLICATION AND REVIVAL OF WILLS
 EFFECT OF EXECUTION OF A CODICIL REFERRING TO A PRIOR WILL
 REVIVAL OF WILLS: REVOCATION OF 2ND WILL REVOKING 1ST WILL DOES NOT
REVIVE THE LATTER
 ALLOWANCE AND DISALLOWANCE OF WILLS (PROBATE)
o Probate or allowance of will defined
100. Ajero v. CA, GR 106720, Sept. 15, 1994, 236 SCRA 488
o Essence of probate
101. Caniza v. CA, GR 110427, Feb. 24, 1997, 268 SCRA 640
o When Court may rule on intrinsic validity
102. Nuguid v. Nuguid, GR L-23445, June 23, 1966, 17 SCRA 449
o General rule on jurisdiction of probate courts; exceptions
103. Agtarap v. Agtarap, GR 177099, June 8, 2011, 651 SCRA 455
o Probate contrasted with validity of the testamentary provisions
104. Sumilang v. Ramagosa, GR L-23135, Dec. 26, 1967, 21 SCRA 1369
o Probate of will mandatory
105. Guevara v. Guevara, GR L-48840, Dec. 29, 1943, 74 Phil. 479
106. Luzon Surety Company, Inc. v. Quebrar, GR L-40517, Jan. 31, 1984,
127 SCRA 296
o Due execution of the will or its extrinsic validity defined
107. Pastor, Jr. v. CA, GR L-56340, June 24, 1983, 207 Phil. 758
o Nature and characteristics of a probate proceeding
108. Guevara v. Guevara, GR L-48840, Dec. 29, 1943, 74 Phil. 479
o Notice by publication essential to validity of the proceeding
109. Manalo v. Paredes, GR 24168, Sept. 22, 1925, 47 Phil. 938
110. Eusebio v. Valmores, GR L-7019, May 31, 1955, 96 Phil. 163
o Probate court bereft of power to adjudicate title to properties
111. Cuizon v. Ramolete, GR L-51291, May 29, 1984, 129 SCRA 495
o Probate court’s limited authority
112. Nittscher v. Nittscher, GR 160530, Nov. 20, 2007, 537 SCRA 681
o Probate of a will conclusive as to its due execution and validity
113. Castañeda v. Alemany, GR 1439, Mar. 19, 1904, 3 Phil. 26
114. Mercado v. Santos, GR 45629, Sept. 22, 1938, 66 Phil. 215
o Conclusive presumption of genuineness of probated will
115. Mercado v. Santos and Daza, GR 45629, Sept. 22, 1938, 66 Phil. 215
o Presentation and probate of a codicil after will is probated
116. Macam v. Gatmaitan, GR 40445, Aug. 17, 1934, 60 Phil. 358
o Intestacy is subordinate to testacy
117. Rodriguez v. Borja, GR No. L-21993, June 21, 1966, 17 SCRA 418
o Doubts to be resolved in favor of testacy
118. Santos v. Manarang, GR L-8235, Mar. 19, 1914, 27 Phil. 209
119. Rodriguez v. CA, GR L-28734, Mar. 28, 1969, 27 SCRA 546
o Testate proceedings for the settlement of the estate of a deceased person
take precedence over intestate proceedings
120. Uriarte v. CFI of Negros, GR L-21938-39, May 29, 1970, 33 SCRA 252
 WHEN WILL MAY BE DISALLOWED
o Lists exclusive; no other grounds that would disallow a will
121. Pecson v. Coronel, GR L-20374, Oct. 11, 1923, 45 Phil. 216
o Issues to be resolved in probate of holographic will
122. Montanaño v. Suesa, GR L-4724, Dec. 24, 1909, 14 Phil. 676
o Only extrinsic validity of wills may be examined by probate court; exceptions
123. Acain v. IAC, GR 72706, Oct. 27, 1987, 155 SCRA 100
124. Valera v. Inserto, GR L-56504, May 7, 1987, 149 SCRA 533
o Undue pressure and influence as ground to avoid a will
125. Pascual v. De la Cruz, GR L-24819, May 30, 1969, 28 SCRA 421
o Fraud and undue influence are repugnant allegations
126. Icasiano v. Icasiano, GR L-18979, June 30, 1964, 11 SCRA 422
o Substantial compliance rule
 127. Rey v. Cartagena, GR 34288, Nov. 10, 1931, 56 Phil. 282
 INSTITUTION OF HEIR; DEFINITION
 EFFECTS OF NON-INSTITUTION OR PARTIAL INSTITUTION OF AN HEIR, ETC.
o Effect of partial disposition of testator’s estate
128. Montinola-Sanson v. CA, GR 76648, Feb. 26, 1988, 158 SCRA 247
 FREEDOM OF DISPOSITION; TESTATE SUCCESSION PREFERRED OVER INTESTACY
129. Cuenco v. CA, GR L-24742, Oct. 26, 1973, 53 SCRA 360
130. Hacbang v. Alo, GR L-191031, Oct. 05, 2015
 DESIGNATION OF HEIR BY NAME OR OTHER IDENTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
 EFFECT OF ERROR IN NAME, ETC. AND IDEN TICAL NAMES
 DISPOSITION IN FAVOR OF UNKNOWN OR UNIDENTIFIED PERSON NOT VALID
 RULE WHERE HEIRS ARE INSTITUTED WITHOUT DESIGNATION OF SHARES
 CONSTRUCTION WHEN HEIRS ARE INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY INSTITUTED
 INSTITUTION OF BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF THE FULL AND HALF BLOOD
 INSTITUTION OF A PERSON AND HIS CHILDREN
 EFFECT OF INSTITUTION OF AN HEIR BASED ON A FALSE CAUSE
o Annulment of institution of heirs based on false cause; requisites
131. Austria v. Reyes, GR L-23079, Feb. 27, 1970, 31 SCRA 754
 INSTITUTION OF ONE OR SEVERAL HEIRS TO AN ALIQUOT PART OF INHERITANCE
 WHEN HEIRS’ TOTAL ALIQUOT PARTS ARE LESS THAN THE WHOLE INHERITANCE
 RULE WHEN HEIRS’ TOTAL ALIQUOT PARTS EXCEED THE ENTIRE ESTATE
 PRETERITION OR PRETERMISSION OF HEIRS
o Preterition defined
132. Aznar v. Duncan, GR L-24365, June 30, 1966, 17 SCRA 590
o Successional rights of illegitimate children
133. Delgado Vda. de De la Rosa v. Heirs of Marciana Rustia Vda. de Damian,
GR 155733, Jan. 27, 2006, 480 SCRA 334
o Rule on preterition applies to testator’s adopted child, not to spouse
134. Neri v. Akutin, GR L-47799, May 21, 1943, 74 Phil. 185
 COMPLETION OF LEGITIME
o Allotment of smaller share than legitime does not invalidate institution of heir
135. Reyes v. Barretto-Datu, GR L-17818, Jan. 20, 1967, 19 SCRA 85
 PREDECEASE, INCAPACITY AND RENUNCIATION; GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATION
OF HEIRS
o Elements of a valid repudiation or waiver of inheritance
136. Borromeo-Herrera v. Borromeo, GR 41171, July 23, 1987
 EFFECTS OF PREDECEASE
 SUBSTITUTION OF HEIRS
 KINDS OF SUBSTITUTION
 SIMPLE OR COMMON SUBSTITUTION
 BRIEF OR COMPENDIOUS SUBSTITUTION
 RECIPROCAL SUBSTITUTION; EFFECTS
 CHARGES AND CONDITIONS IMPOSABLE UPON THE SUBSTITUTE
 FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTION
o Duty of first heir to preserve the property for second heir required
137. Crisologo v. Singson, GR L-13876, Feb. 28, 1962, 4 SCRA 491
o Conditions of vulgar or simple substitution
138. PCIB v. Escolin, GR L-27860 and L-27896, Mar. 29, 1974
o Meaning of “one degree” from the first heir
139. Palacios v. Vda. De Ramirez, GR L-27952, Feb. 15, 1982, 111 SCRA
704
 LEGITIME NOT TO BE AFFECTED BY FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTION
 FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTION MUST BE EXPRESSLY MADE TO BE VALID
 ENTITLEMENT OF FIDUCIARY TO DEDUCTIONS FOR LEGITIMATE EXPENSES
 WHEN THE RIGHTS OF THE FIRST AND SECOND HEIRS ARE VESTED
 WHEN FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTIONS ARE DEEMED VOID
 EFFECTS OF NULLITY OF FIDEICOMMISSARY SUBSTITUTION
 PROVISION ON USUFRUCT
 DISPOSITION DECLARING ESTATE INALIENABLE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD
o Purpose of restriction on alienability of estate under Article 870
140. Palad v. Governor of Quezon Province, GR L-24302, Aug. 18, 1972, 46
SCRA 354
 CONDITIONAL TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS AND TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS
WITH A TERM; FREEDOM OF DISPOSITION
 CHARGE, CONDITION OR SUBSTITUTION UPON THE LEGITIME DEEMED VOID
 IMPOSSIBLE AND UNLAWFUL CONDITIONS
o Condition contrary to law to be considered as unwritten
141. Miciano v. Brimo, GR L-22595, Nov. 1, 1927, 50 Phil. 867
 CONDITION PROHIBITING MARRIAGE
 SCRIPTURA CAPTATORIA OR DISPOSICION CAPTATORIA
 PURELY POTESTATIVE CONDITION
 CASUAL AND MIXED CONDITIONS
 DISPOSITION WITH A SUSPENSIVE TERM
 NEGATIVE POTESTATIVE CONDITION
 0EFFECT OF SUSPENSIVE CONDITION OR TERM OR FAILURE TO GIVE BOND
 PLACEMENT OF THE ESTATE UNDER ADMINISTRATION MODE
 ANALOGOUS AND CONSTRUCTIVE COMPLIANCE
 RULES FOR CONDITIONAL OBLIGATIONS
 TERM OR PERIOD IN TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS
 LEGITIME; DEFINITION; WHAT CONSTITUTES LEGITIME
o Claim for legitime does not amount to claim of title
142. Vizconde v. CA, GR 118449, Feb. 11, 1998, 286 SCRA 217
o Accrual of cause of action to enforce a legitime
143. Imperial v. CA, GR 112483, Oct. 8, 1999, 316 SCRA 393
 WHO ARE THE COMPULSORY HEIRS?
o Compulsory heir defined
144. Rocha v. Tuason, GR 14254, Aug. 5, 1919, 39 Phil. 976
 LEGITIME OF LEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND DESCENDANTS
 LEGITIME OF LEGITIMATE PARENTS OR ASCENDANTS
 LEGITIME OF LEGITIMATE PARENTS
 RESERVA TRONCAL
 PRINCIPLE OF RESERVA TRONCAL
o Reserva troncal defined
145. De Papa v. Camacho, GR L-28032, Sept. 24, 1986, 144 SCRA 281
o Lines of transmission in reserva troncal
146. Gonzales v. CFI of Manila, GR L-34395, May 19, 1981, 104 SCRA 479
o Who may become reservees (reservatorios)
147. Jardin v. Villamayor, GR 47889, Jan. 17, 1941, 72 Phil. 392
o Propositus, the person from whom degree should be reckoned
148. Cabardo v. Villanueva, GR 19003, Dec. 13, 1922, 44 Phil. 186
o 4th degree relatives cannot be reservees nor can be represented
149. Florentino v. Florentino, GR 14856, Nov. 15, 1919, 40 Phil. 480
o Nearest relatives within 3rd degree exclude the more remote ones
150. Padura v. Baldovino, GR L-11960, Dec. 27, 1958, 104 Phil. 1065
o Resolutory conditions created by reserva troncal
151. Sienes v. Esparcia, GR L-12957, Mar. 24, 1961, 1 SCRA 750
o Reservor’s alienation of reserva subject to resolutory condition
152. Lunsod v. Ortega, GR 14904, Sept. 19, 1921
o Inchoate right of reservee (reservatorio)
153. Riosa v. Rocha, GR 23770, Feb. 18, 1926, 48 Phil. 737
154. Velayo Bernardo v. Siojo, GR 36078, Mar. 11, 1933, 58 Phil. 89
 155. Cano v. Director of Lands, GR L-10701, Jan. 16, 1959, 105 Phil. 1
o Property subject of reserva acquired by gratuitous title
156. Chua v. CFI of Negros Occidental, Branch V, GR L-29901, Aug. 31,
1977, 78 SCRA 412
o Other cases illustrating reserva troncal
157. Nieva and Alcala v. Alcala and Deocampo, GR 13386, Oct. 27, 1920, 41
Phil. 915;
158. Maghirang and Gutierrez v. Balcita, GR 22066, Dec. 2, 1924, 46 Phil.
551;
159. Centeno v. Centeno, GR 28265, Nov. 5, 1928, 52 Phil. 322;
160. Director of Lands v. Aguas, GR 42737, Aug. 11, 1936, 63 Phil. 279; and
161. Aglibot v. Mañalac, GR L-14530, Apr. 25, 1962, 4 SCRA 1030;
o Right of reservation only up to third degree relatives; exception
162. Florentino v. Florentino, GR 14856, Nov. 15, 1919, 40 Phil. 480
o Duty of the reservista; what he acquires
163. Sumaya v. IAC, GR 68843–44, Sept. 02, 1991, 201 SCRA 178
164. Edroso v. Sablan, GR 6878, Sept. 13, 1913, 25 Phil. 295
o When reservatorio becomes exclusive owner of reservable property
165. Dizon and Dizon v. Galang, GR 23144, Jan. 14, 1926, 48 Phil. 601
 LEGITIMES OF 1 LEGITIMATE CHILD AND SURVIVING SPOUSE
 LEGITIMES OF LEGITIMATE PARENTS AND SURVIVING SPOUSE
 LEGITIMES OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND SURVIVING SPOUSE
 LEGITIMES OF LEGITIMATE AND ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN
 LEGITIMES OF LEGITIMATE PARENTS AND ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN
 LEGITIMES OF LEGITIMATE AND ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND SURVIVING SPOUSE
 LEGITIMES OF LEGITIMATE PARENTS, ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND SURVIVING
SPOUSE
 LEGITIME OF THE SURVIVING SPOUSE
 LEGITIME OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN
 RIGHTS OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN TO LEGITIME; WHEN TRANSMITTED
 LEGITIMES OF ILLEGITIMATE PARENTS AND SURVIVING SPOUSE OF ILLEGITIMATE
CHILD
 NON-DISPOSABILITY OF LEGITIME; EXCEPTIONS
 RENUNCIATION OR COMPROMISE OF FUTURE LEGITIME VOID
 REMEDY IN CASE OF INCOMPLETE LEGITIME
 INOFFICIOUS OR EXCESSIVE TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS; REMEDIES
 DEDUCTION AND COLLATION
 DONATIONS TO CHILDREN AND STRANGERS AND INOFFICIOUS DONATIONS
 TREATMENT OF DONATIONS GIVEN TO ILLEGITIMATE CHILD
 PROCEDURE FOR REDUCTION OF TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITIONS AND DONATIONS
 RULES ON REDUCTION OF DEVISES
 CONSEQUENCES OF NON-AVAILMENT OF RIGHT UNDER ARTICLE
 FREEDOM OF TESTATOR TO DISPOSE OF FREE PORTION
 DISINHERITANCE; DEFINITION
 DISINHERITANCE CAN ONLY BE EFFECTED THROUGH A WILL
 BURDEN OF PROVING CAUSE OF DISINHERITANCE RESTS ON OTHER HEIRS
 GROUNDS FOR IMPERFECT OR INEFFECTIVE DISINHERITANCE; EFFECT
 SUFFICIENT CAUSES FOR DISINHERITING CHILDREN AND DESCENDANTS
 SUFFICIENT CAUSES FOR DISINHERITING PARENTS OR ASCENDANTS
 SUFFICIENT CAUSES FOR DISINHERITING A SPOUSE
 EFFECT OF ENSUING RECONCILIATION BETWEEN OFFENDER AND OFFENDED
 EFFECTS OF DISINHERITANCE ON CHILDREN. DESCENDANTS AND PARENTS
 LEGACIES AND DEVISES; DEFINITION
 WHAT CAN BE BEQUEATHED OR DEVISED
 PERSONS CHARGED WITH LEGACIES AND DEVISES
  LIABILITY WHEN ONE OR NONE OF THE HEIRS CHARGED WITH LEGACY OF DEVISE
 LIABILITY FOR LOSS OR DESTRUCTION OF THING DEVISED OR BEQUEATHED
 LIABILITY FOR EVICTION
 REMEDIES IF TESTATOR, HEIR OR LEGATEE OWNS ONLY A PART OR INTEREST IN THE
THING BEQUEATHED
 LEGACY OR DEVICE VITIATED BY MISTAKE
 LEGACY OR DEVICE OF A THING NOT OWNED BY TESTATOR
 LEGACY OR DEVISE OF THING BELONGING TO LEGATEE OR DEVISEE
 EFFECTS OF GRATUITOUS AND ONEROUS ACQUISITION BY LEGATEE OR DEVISEE OF
THING BEQUEATHED AFTER THE MAKING OF WILL
 LEGACY OR DEVISE OF THING PLEDGED OR MORTGAGED
 LEGACIES OF CREDIT OF A THIRD PERSON AND REMISSION OF DEBT OF LEGATEE
 WHEN LEGACY OF CREDIT OR REMISSION REVOKED
 WHAT A GENERIC LEGACY OF RELEASE OR REMISSION OF DEBTS COVERS
 APPLICATION OF LEGACY OR DEVISE MADE TO A CREDITOR
 0DISPOSITION OF NON-EXISTING DEBT AND OVERPAYMENT OF SPECIFIC DEBT
 ALTERNATIVE LEGACY OR DEVISE
 LEGACY OR DEVISE OF GENERIC PROPERTY
 RIGHT OF CHOICE
 CHOICE MADE IRREVOCABLE
 LEGACY FOR EDUCATION OR SUPPORT
 LEGACY OF PENSION
 LEGACY OF A THING UNDER USUFRUCT
 RIGHT TO PURE AND SIMPLE LEGACIES OR DEVISES; WHEN ACQUIRED
 LEGACY OR DEVICE OF SPECIFIC AND DETERMINATE THING
 LEGACY OF GENERIC THING AND OWNERSHIP OF ITS FRUITS AND INTERESTS
 ORDER OF PREFERENCE IN THE PAYMENT OF LEGACIES OR DEVISES
 MANNER OF DELIVERY OF LEGACY OR DEVISE
 EXPENSES FOR DELIVERY OF THING BEQUEATHED FOR WHOSE ACCOUNT
 REQUEST FOR DELIVERY AND POSSESSION OF THING BEQUEATHED
 ACCEPTANCE AND REPUDIATION IN PART OF LEGACY OR DEVISE
 ACCEPTANCE OR RENUNCIATION OF ONEROUS AND/OR GRATUITOUS LEGACIES OR
DEVISES
 EFFECT OF INEFFECTIVE LEGACY OR DEVISE
 GROUNDS FOR REVOCATION OF LEGACY OR DEVISE
 EFFECT OF MISTAKE AS TO NAME OF THE THING BEQUEATHED OR DEVISED
 DISPOSITION IN FAVOR OF TESTATOR'S RELATIVES; RULE OF PROXIMITY APPLIES
CHAPTER III: LEGAL OR INTESTATE SUCCESSION265
 LEGAL OR INTESTATE SUCCESSION; DEFINITION
 CAUSES OF INTESTACY
 ORDER OF INTESTATE OR LEGAL SUCCESSION
o Classification of intestate or legal heirs
166. Rosales v. Rosales, GR L-40789, Feb. 27, 1987, 148 SCRA 69
 RULE OF EQUAL DIVISION
 RELATIONSHIP; FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS AND RULES IN RELATIONSHIP
 PROXIMITY OF RELATIONSHIP; HOW DETERMINED
 DIRECT AND COLLATERAL LINES
 DEGREES; HOW COUNTED
 KINDS OF BLOOD RELATIONSHIP
 INCAPACITY TO SUCCEED; WHEN ACCRETION IN INTESTACY TAKES PLACE
 EFFECT OF REPUDIATION OF INHERITANCE BY NEAREST RELATIVES
 RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION; DEFINITION
 REPRESENTATIVE SUCCEEDS THE DECEDENT NOT THE PERSON REPRESENTED
 REPRESENTATION OCCURS ONLY IN THE DIRECT DESCENDING LINE
 CAPACITY OF REPRESENTATIVE TO SUCCEED DECEDENT
 DIVISION OF ESTATE IN SUCCESSION BY REPRESENTATION
 PER CAPITA
 PER STIRPES
 INHERITANCE OF NEPHEWS AND NIECES
167. Abellana-Bacayo v. Ferraris-Borromeo, GR L-19382, Aug. 31, 1965, 14
SCRA 986
o Nephew or niece of full blood entitled to inherit share double that of nephew
or niece of half blood
168. Bicomong v. Almanza, GR L-37365, Nov. 29, 1977, 80 SCRA 421
 REPRESENTATION BY RENOUNCER OR REPUDIATOR
 REPRESENTATION OF RENOUNCER OR REPUDIATOR
o Representation in adoption
169. De La Puerta v. CA, GR 77867, Feb. 6, 1990, 181 SCRA 861
 ORDER OF INTESTATE SUCCESSION
 SUCCESSION PERTAINS TO DESCENDING DIRECT LINE
 ADOPTED CHILD SUCCEEDS TO THE PROPERTY OF THE ADOPTING PARENTS
 CHILDREN OF DECEASED ALWAYS INHERIT FROM HIM IN THEIR OWN RIGHT
 INHERITANCE OF CHILDREN OF DECEASED AND DESCENDANTS OF OTHER
CHILDREN WHO ARE DEAD
 GRANDCHILDREN INHERIT BY RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION; EXCEPTION
 LEGITIME OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILD; PROPORTION
 LEGAL HEIRS OF ADOPTED CHILD
 INHERITANCE OF PARENTS AND ASCENDANTS
 INHERITANCE OF FATHER AND/OR MOTHER 291
 INHERITANCE OF ASCENDANTS NEAREST IN DEGREE
 INHERITANCE OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN
 INHERITANCE OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND DESCENDANTS OF ANOTHER
ILLEGITIMATE CHILD
 HEREDITARY RIGHTS OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN; WHEN TRANSMITTED
 INHERITANCE OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND LEGITIMATE ASCENDANTS
 RULE OF BARRIER BETWEEN LEGITIMATE AND ILLEGITIMATE FAMILIES
o Iron curtain bar rule
170. Diaz v. IAC, GR L-66574, June 17, 1987, 150 SCRA 645
o Cases applying the rule
171. Corpus v. Corpus, 85 SCRA 567
172. Cache v. Udan, 13 SCRA 693
173. Llorente v. Rodriguez, 10 Phil. 585; Allarde v. Abaya, 57 Phil. 909
174. Anuran v. Aquino and Ortiz, 38 Phil. 29
175. Leonardo v. CA, 120 SCRA 890
 INHERITANCE FROM ILLEGITIMATE DECEDENT
 SURVIVING SPOUSE OF ILLEGITIMATE CHILD; ALONE OR WITH RELATIVES
 INHERITANCE OF SURVIVING SPOUSE
o Surviving spouse not an intestate heir of parent-in-law
176. Rosales v. Rosales, GR L-40789, Feb. 27, 1987, 148 SCRA 69
 SURVIVING SPOUSE CONCURRING WITH A LEGITIMATE CHILD ENTITLED TO 1/2 OF
THE INTESTATE ESTATE
177. Santillon v. Miranda, GR L-19281, June 30, 1965, 14 SCRA 563
178. Heirs of Ignacio Conti v. CA, GR 118464, Dec. 21, 1998, 300 SCRA 345
 RULE WHEN WIDOW OR WIDOWER SURVIVES WITH LEGITIMATE PARENTS OR
ASCENDANTS
 RULE WHEN SURVIVING SPOUSE CONCURS WITH ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN
 RULE WHEN WIDOW OR WIDOWER SURVIVES WITH LEGITIMATE AND ILLEGITIMATE
CHILDREN OR THEIR DESCENDANTS
 RULE WHEN NEAREST SURVIVING RELATIVES OF THE DECEDENT ARE THE PARENTS,
SPOUSE AND AN ADOPTED CHILD
 RULE WHEN BROTHERS AND SISTERS OR THEIR CHILDREN CONCUR WITH
SURVIVING SPOUSE
o Brother’s right to succeed
179. Carlos v. Sandoval, GR 179922, Dec. 16, 2008, 574 SCRA 116
o What precludes succession by collateral relatives
180. Gonzales v. CA, GR 117740, Oct. 30, 1998, 298 SCRA 322
 SURVIVING SPOUSE WHO GAVE CAUSE FOR LEGAL SEPARATION NOT ENTITLED TO
SUCCESSIONAL RIGHTS
 COLLATERAL RELATIVES SUCCEED IN DEFAULT OF ASCENDANTS, ILLEGITIMATE
CHILDREN OR SURVIVING SPOUSE
o Collateral relatives excluded by children of intestate decedent
181. Cacho v. Udan, GR L-19996, Apr. 30, 1965, 13 SCRA 693
 RULE WHEN BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF THE FULL BLOOD ARE THE ONLY
SURVIVORS
 RULE WHEN BROTHERS AND SISTERS SURVIVE WITH NEPHEWS AND NIECES
 RULE WHEN BROTHER AND SISTERS OF THE FULL BLOOD CONCUR WITH BROTHERS
AND SISTERS OF THE HALF BLOOD
 RULE WHEN BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF THE HALF BLOOD, SOME ON THE FATHER'S
AND SOME ON THE MOTHER'S SIDE, ARE THE ONLY SURVIVORS
 CHILDREN OF BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF THE HALF BLOOD
o Nephew or niece of full blood entitled to inherit share double that of the
nephew or niece of half blood
182. Padura v. Baldovino, GR L-11960, Dec. 27, 1958, 104 Phil. 1065
183. Alviar v. Alviar, GR L-22402, June 30, 1969, 28 SCRA 610
 OTHER COLLATERAL RELATIVES; WHEN ENTITLED TO SUCCESSION
184. Abellana-Bacayo v. Ferraris-Borromeo, GR L-19382, Aug. 31, 1965, 14
SCRA 986
 COLLATERALS BEYOND 5TH DEGREE EXCLUDED
 STATE AS INTESTATE HEIR
 ESCHEAT PROCEDURE
o Escheat defined
185. Municipal Council of San Pedro, Laguna v. Colegio de San Jose, GR L-
45460, Feb. 25, 1938, 65 Phil. 318
186. RCBC v. Hi-Tri Development Corp., GR 192413, June 13, 2012, 672
SCRA 514
o Escheat proceeding an exercise of state sovereignty
187. Republic v. CA, GR 143483, Jan. 31, 2002, 375 SCRA 484
o Legal basis of state’s right to receive property in escheat; state as last
intestate heir
188. Rosales v. Rosales, GR L-40789, Feb. 27, 1987, 148 SCRA 69
o Requisites for the filing of petition for escheat
189. City of Manila v. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila, GR L-10033,
Aug. 30, 1917
o Reversion or escheat of lands which sold to disqualified aliens
190. Lee v. Republic, GR 128195, Oct. 3, 2001, 418 Phil. 793
o Interested party defined
191. Locsin, Sr. v. Locsin, Jr., GR 146737, Dec. 10, 2001, 423 Phil. 192
o Period within which a claimant must file his claim
192. Republic of the Philippines v. CA, GR 143483, Jan. 31, 2002
o Escheat proceedings cannot be converted into probate proceedings
193. Negros Occidental Municipalities of Magallon, Isabela and La Castellana
v. Bezore. GR L-14157, Oct. 26, 1960, 109 Phil. 829
 ASSIGNMENT OF ESTATE
 RIGHT OF PERSON LEGALLY ENTITLED TO ESCHEATED PROPERTY
  ORDER OF PREFERENCE AND ORDER OF CONCURRENCE IN INTESTATE SUCCESSION
UNDER ARTICLES 978 TO 1014
194. Manuel v. Ferrer, GR 117246, Aug. 21, 1995
CHAPTER IV: PROVISIONS COMMON TO TESTATE AND INTESTATE SUCCESSIONS 313
 RIGHT OF ACCRETION; ACCRETION
 REQUISITES OF ACCRETION IN TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION
 RIGHT OF ACCRETION APPLIES WHERE IDENTITY OF SHARE NOT DETERMINATE
 ACCRETION IN LEGAL OR INTESTATE SUCCESSION
 PROPORTIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF SHARE SUBJECT OF ACCRETION
 6RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS ASSUMED BY HEIRS RECEIVING THE ACCRETION
 WHEN RIGHT OF ACCRETION OCCURS AMONG COMPULSORY HEIRS
 EFFECT IF THERE IS NO ACCRETION
 ACCRETION INVOLVING DEVISEES, LEGATEES AND USUFRUCTUARIES
 CAPACITY TO SUCCEED BY WILL OR BY INTESTACY; WHO MAY SUCCEED BY WILL OR
BY INTESTATE SUCCESSION
 REQUISITES FOR INHERITANCE BY WILL OR BY INTESTACY
 CAPACITY TO SUCCEED OF JURIDICAL AND NON-JURIDICAL ENTITIES
 PERSONS INCAPACITATED TO SUCCEED BASED ON UNDUE INFLUENCE OR INTEREST
 PROHIBITIONS ON DONATIONS APPLICABLE TO TESTAMENTARY PROVISIONS
 DISPOSITION FOR PRAYERS AND PIOUS WORKS FOR THE TESTATOR’S SOUL
 TESTAMENTARY PROVISIONS IN FAVOR OF THE POOR IN GENERAL
 PROVISION IN FAVOR OF A DISQUALIFIED PERSON UNDER ANY GUISE VOID
 ACTS OF UNWORTHINESS
 WHEN CAUSE OF UNWORTHINESS DEEMED INEFFECTIVE
 TIME TO DETERMINE CAPACITY OF HEIR
 RIGHT OF DISQUALIFIED HEIR TO NECESSARY EXPENSES FOR PRESERVATION
 LIABILITY OF INCAPACITATED PERSON POSSESSING HEREDITARY PROPERTY IN BAD
FAITH
 LAW GOVERNING CAPACITY TO SUCCEED
o Doctrine of renvoi; when applicable
195. Bellis v. Bellis, GR L-23678, June 6, 1967, 20 SCRA 258
o Lex rei sitae or Situs rule
196. Lim v. Collector, GR 11759, Mar. 16, 1917, 36 Phil. 472
 PERIOD TO RECOVER INHERITANCE FROM DISQUALIFIED HEIR
 ACCEPTANCE AND REPUDIATION OF THE INHERITANCE; A FREE AND VOLUNTARY ACT
o What acts do not constitute acceptance
197. Ignacio v. Martinez, GR L-10722, Feb. 18, 1916, 33 Phil. 576
 RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF ACCEPTANCE OR REPUDIATION 338
 REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCEPTANCE OR REPUDIATION
 PERSONS WHO MAY ACCEPT OR REPUDIATE
o Judicial approval required in repudiation by parents and guardians
198. Guy v. CA, GR 163707, Sept. 15, 2006, 502 SCRA 151

 JUDICIAL AUTHORIZATION REQUIRED IN CASE OF REPUDIATION BY LEGAL

REPRESENTATIVE OF AN ENTITY
o Property subject to collation; assessment of property donated
199. Tordilla v. Tordilla, GR 39547, May 3, 1934, 60 Phil. 162
 ACCEPTANCE OR REPUDIATION BY PUBLIC OFFICES SUBJECT TO GOVERNMENT
APPROVAL
 REPUDIATION BY MARRIED WOMAN; EXCEPTIONS
 ACCEPTANCE OR REPUDIATION OF INHERITANCE BY DEAF-MUTES
 EXPRESS OR TACIT ACCEPTANCE
 INSTANCES OF TACIT ACCEPTANCE
 FORMS OF REPUDIATION
 REPUDIATION PREJUDICIAL TO HEIR’S OWN CREDITORS
 EFFECT OF HEIR’S DEATH WITHOUT ACCEPTANCE OR REPUDIATION
 ACCEPTANCE AND REPUDIATION BY SOME HEIRS
 HEIR BY WILL AND BY LAW REPUDIATING AS TESTAMENTARY HEIR
 IRREVOCABILITY AND INDISPUTABILITY OF ACCEPTANCE AND REPUDIATION;
EXCEPTIONS
 IMPLIED ACCEPTANCE BY INACTION WITHIN REGLEMENTARY PERIOD
 EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS; ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES OF DECEASED
PERSONS GOVERNED BY RULES OF COURT
 APPLICABLE PROVISIONS WHERE ESTATE’S ASSETS INSUFFICIENT TO PAY DEBTS
 CORPORATION OR ASSOCIATION AS ESTATE EXECUTOR, ADMINISTRATOR,
GUARDIAN, OR TRUSTEE
 COLLATION; DEFINITION
o Limitations on donation; when donation is collatable or reducible
200. Vda. de Tupas v. Br. XLIII, RTC of Negros Occ., GR L-65800, Oct. 03,
1986, 144 SCRA 622
o What is brought to collation; rationale for the rule
201. Vizconde v. CA, GR 118449, Feb. 11, 1998, 286 SCRA 217
o When may inofficiousness of donation be determined
202. Imperial v. CA, GR 112483, Oct. 8, 1999, 316 SCRA 393
o Prescriptive period for action to reduce inofficious donation
203. Mateo v. Lagua, GR L-26270, Oct. 30, 1969, 29 SCRA 864
 OBLIGATION OF COMPULSORY HEIR TO COLLATE
 INSTANCES WHEN COLLATION SHALL NOT TAKE PLACE
 PROPERTY LEFT BY WILL CONSTRUED AS DEVISES OR LEGACIES; HOW COLLATED
 GRANDCHILDREN WHO SURVIVE WITH UNCLES, AUNTS OR FIRST COUSINS AND
INHERIT BY RIGHT OF REPRESENTATION
 DONATIONS TO CHILDREN OF COMPULSORY HEIRS
 DONATIONS TO SPOUSE OF CHILD
 EXPENSES FOR SUPPORT, ETC. NOT SUBJECT TO COLLATION
 EXPENSES FOR CHILD’S CAREER
 PAYMENTS FOR CHILD’S DEBTS, ETC.
 GIFTS FOR CHILD’S WEDDING
 WHAT IS BROUGHT TO COLLATION; PRINCIPLES OF RES PERIT DOMINO AND
ACCESSION
 DONATIONS MADE BY BOTH PARENTS AND BY ONE PARENT ONLY
 EQUALIZATION OF SHARES OF DONEE AND CO-HEIRS
 WHAT MAY BE RECEIVED IN CASE COLLATABLE PROPERTY HAS NO EQUIVALENT
 FRUITS AND INTEREST OF THE COLLATABLE PROPERTY
 REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES IN CASE OF TOTALLY INOFFICIOUS DONATION
 DISTRIBUTION OF ESTATE MUST NOT BE DISRUPTED BY ISSUE ON COLLATION
 PARTITION AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE ESTATE; CONCEPT OF CO-OWNERSHIP
o Co-ownership defined
204. Alejandrino v. CA, GR 114151, Sept. 17, 1998, 295 SCRA 536
205. Rizal v. Naredo, GR 151898, Mar. 14, 2012, 668 SCRA 114
 PARTITION
o Partition by extrajudicial settlement of the estate
206. Guico v. Bautista, GR L-14921, Dec. 31, 1960, 110 Phil. 584
o Rationale for the rule on extrajudicial partition
207. Vda. De Rodriguez v. Tan, GR L-6044, Nov. 24, 1952, 92 Phil. 273
o Judicial action for partition as a remedy of a co-owner
208. Quintos v. Nicolas, GR 210252, June 16, 2014, 726 SCRA 482
o Phases of judicial partition
209. Sepulveda, Sr. v. Pelaez, GR L-152195, Jan. 31, 2005, 450 SCRA 302
o Delineations of the 2 phases of judicial partition
210. Maglucot-aw v. Maglucot, GR 132518, Mar. 28, 2000, 385 Phil. 720
o Action for partition does not prescribe and is not barred by laches
 211. Santos v. Santos, GR 139524, Oct. 12, 2000, 396 Phil. 928
o Action for partition an action for declaration of co-ownership
212. Vda. de Daffon v. CA, GR 129017, Aug. 20, 2002, 436 Phil. 233
o Family home protected from immediate partition
213. Arriola v. Arriola, GR 177703, Jan. 28, 2008, 542 SCRA 666
o Court to determine first the issue ownership prior to effecting partition
214. Reyes-De Leon v. Del Rosario, GR 152862, July 26, 2004, 479 Phil. 98,
107
 PARTITION BY AN ACT INTER VIVOS
o Partition inter vivos; how made and forms required
215. Chavez v. IAC, GR 68282, Nov. 08, 1990, 191 SCRA 211
o Partition inter vivos requires a prior will
216. Romero v. Villamor, GR L-10850, Dec. 20, 1957, 102 Phil. 641
o Partition inter vivos void where will void
217. Legasto v. Verzosa, GR 2344, Mar. 31, 1930, 54 Phil. 766
o Partition of estate in will valid
218. Dizon-Rivera v. Dizon, GR L-24561, June 30, 1970, 33 SCRA 554
o Partition of inherited property need not be in a public document
219. Alejandrino v. CA, GR 114151, Sept. 17, 1998, 295 SCRA 536
o Oral partition valid; non-registration of extrajudicial settlement does not affect
its validity
220. Heirs of Teves v. CA, GR 109963, Oct. 13, 1999, 316 SCRA 632
 PARTITION BY THIRD PERSON OR MANDATORY
 PARTITION PRESUMED FROM ACTS INTENDED TO DIVIDE ESTATE
o Sale deemed to be a partition
221. Tuason v. Tuason, Jr., GR L-3404, Apr. 2, 1951, 88 Phil. 428
 TESTATOR EMPOWERED TO FORBID PARTITION FOR 20 YEARS; EXCEPTIONS
 INSTITUTION OF VOLUNTARY HEIRS WITH SUSPENSIVE CONDITION
 EQUALITY OF PARTITION AMONG CO-HEIRS
 CONSTRUCTIVE PARTITION THROUGH PAYMENT OF CO-HEIRS OR PUBLIC SALE
 MUTUAL ACCOUNTING TO BE RENDERED BY CO-HEIRS
 LEGAL REDEMPTION IN FAVOR OF CO-HEIRS
o Application of Article 1088
222. Castro v. Castro, GR L-7464, Oct. 24, 1955, 97 Phil. 705
o Rule in Article 1088 the same as in Article 1620
223. Saturnino v. Paulino, GR L-7385, May 19, 1955, 97 Phil. 50
o Purpose of Article 1088
224. De Jesus v. Manglapus, GR L-527, May 28, 1948, 81 Phil. 114
225. Hernaez vs. Hernaez, GR 10027, Nov. 13, 1915, 32 Phil. 214
o Right of redemption in case of sale
226. Villanueva v. Florendo, GR L-33158, Oct. 17, 1985, 139 SCRA 329
227. Caro v. CA, GR L-46001, Mar. 25, 1982, 113 SCRA 10

 DELIVERY OF TITLES TO CO-HEIRS

 EFFECTS OF PARTITION
o Sale by heir of part of his share valid
228. Habaña v. Imbo, GR L-15598 & L-15726, Mar. 31, 1964, 10 SCRA 471
o Co-heir can sell his share of estate even before approval of partition
229. Cea v. CA, GR L-1776, Oct. 27, 1949; Beltran v. Doriano, 32 Phil. 66
o Sale of rights, etc. in property under administration or in custodia legis
230. Jakosalem v. Rafols, GR 48372, July 24, 1942, 73 Phil. 628
 OBLIGATION OF MUTUAL WARRANTY BY CO-HEIRS
 RULE AS TO THE PROPORTIONAL LIABILITY OF CO-HEIRS ON WARRANTY
 10-YEAR PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD FOR ENFORCEMENT OF WARRANTIES
 CREDIT ASSIGNED TO CO-HEIR IN PARTITION; WARRANTY OF DEBTOR’S SOLVENCY
 INSTANCES WHEN THERE IS NO MUTUAL WARRANTY
 RESCISSION AND NULLITY OF PARTITION
 RESCISSION OF PARTITION DUE TO LESION
 PARTITION MADE BY TESTATOR HIMSELF NOT SUBJECT OF RESCISSION
 ACTION FOR RESCISSION DUE TO LESION; PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD
 DEFENDANT’S OPTIONS; FORMS OF INDEMNITY
 HEIR WHO ALIENATED SHARE CANNOT SUE FOR RESCISSION DUE TO LESION
 INCOMPLETENESS OF PARTITION NOT A GROUND FOR RESCISSION
 EFFECT OF PRETERITION OF COMPULSORY HEIR IN PARTITION
o Preterition a concept of testamentary succession and not of partition
231. Neri v. Akutin, GR 47799, June 13, 1941, 72 Phil. 322
 EFFECT OF INCLUSION OF NON-HEIR IN PARTITION