Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 378 views

    Ocampo Vs Ocampo GR 187879

    Uploaded by

    JaylordPataotao
    Petitioners filed a petition for intestate proceedings regarding the estate of Vicenta and Maxima Ocampo after the death of their son Leonardo. Respondents, who are Leonardo's siblings, took control of the estate properties after Leonardo's death to the exclusion of Petitioners. The RTC removed Respondents as special administrators of the estate. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) a special administrator is an officer of the court expected to act in the best interest of the entire estate, not any particular party; (2) the RTC has discretion to appoint or remove a special administrator based on grounds other than those enumerated in the rules; and (3) the RTC's decision removing Respondents as special administrators

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Ocampo Vs Ocampo GR 187879

    Uploaded by

    JaylordPataotao
    378 views1 page
    Petitioners filed a petition for intestate proceedings regarding the estate of Vicenta and Maxima Ocampo after the death of their son Leonardo. Respondents, who are Leonardo's siblings, took control of the estate properties after Leonardo's death to the exclusion of Petitioners. The RTC removed Respondents as special administrators of the estate. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) a special administrator is an officer of the court expected to act in the best interest of the entire estate, not any particular party; (2) the RTC has discretion to appoint or remove a special administrator based on grounds other than those enumerated in the rules; and (3) the RTC's decision removing Respondents as special administrators

    Original Description:

    Ocampo vs Ocampo GR 187879

    Original Title

    Ocampo vs Ocampo GR 187879

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Petitioners filed a petition for intestate proceedings regarding the estate of Vicenta and Maxima Ocampo after the death of their son Leonardo. Respondents, who are Leonardo's siblings, took control of the estate properties after Leonardo's death to the exclusion of Petitioners. The RTC removed Respondents as special administrators of the estate. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) a special administrator is an officer of the court expected to act in the best interest of the entire estate, not any particular party; (2) the RTC has discretion to appoint or remove a special administrator based on grounds other than those enumerated in the rules; and (3) the RTC's decision removing Respondents as special administrators

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    378 views1 page

    Ocampo Vs Ocampo GR 187879

    Uploaded by

    JaylordPataotao
    Petitioners filed a petition for intestate proceedings regarding the estate of Vicenta and Maxima Ocampo after the death of their son Leonardo. Respondents, who are Leonardo's siblings, took control of the estate properties after Leonardo's death to the exclusion of Petitioners. The RTC removed Respondents as special administrators of the estate. The Supreme Court ruled that (1) a special administrator is an officer of the court expected to act in the best interest of the entire estate, not any particular party; (2) the RTC has discretion to appoint or remove a special administrator based on grounds other than those enumerated in the rules; and (3) the RTC's decision removing Respondents as special administrators

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    DALISAY E. OCAMPO, VINCE E. OCAMPO, MELINDA CARLA E. OCAMPO, and LEONARDO E.

    OCAMPO,
    JR., vs. RENATO M. OCAMPO and ERLINDA M. OCAMPO

    G.R. No. 187879 July 5, 2010 Nachura

    FACTS:

    Petitioners are the surviving wife and the children of leonardo ocampo who died Jan. 23, 2004.
    Leonardo and his siblings respondents are the legitimate children and only heirs of spouses Vicenta and
    Maxima Ocampo who died intestate. Petitioners initiated a petition for intestate proceedings and
    alleged that upon the death of Vicente and Maxima respondents and their brother Leonardo jointly
    controlled the estate of their parents. however, when leonardo died, respondents took possession,
    control and mgt of properties to the exclusion of petitioners. Respondent filed their opposition but was
    denied by the rtc. respondent reiterated their prayer for appointment of joint special administrators.
    Petitioners argued that they had been deprived of their fair share of income of the estate and the
    appointment of respondents as special joint administrator would further cause injustice to them.

    ISSUE:

    Is the removal of the special administrator correct?

    RULING

    A special administrator is an officer of the court who is subject to its supervision and control, expected
    to work for the best interest of the entire estate, with a view to its smooth administration and speedy
    settlement. When appointed, he or she is not regarded as an agent or representative of the parties
    suggesting the appointment. The principal object of the appointment of a temporary administrator is to
    preserve the estate until it can pass to the hands of a person fully authorized to administer it for the
    benefit of creditors and heirs, pursuant to Section 2 of Rule 80 of the Rules of Court.

    While the rtc considered the respondents were the nearest kin of their deceased parents in their
    appointment as joint special administrators, this is not a mandatory requirement for the appointment.
    It has long been settled that the selection and removal of a special administrators is not governed by the
    rules regarding the selection and removal of regular administrators. The probate court may appoint or
    remove special administrators based on the grounds other than those enumerated in the rules at its
    discretion. The appointment or removal of a special administrators, being discretionary, is thus
    interlocutory and may be assailed through a petition for certiorari under rule 65 of the rules of court.
    Wherefore, the petition is partially granted, the decision with respect to the revocation of the special
    administration in favor of renato ocampo and erlinda ocampo is reinstated. The appointment of melinda
    carla ocampo as regular administratrix is set aside.

    You might also like