Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 41 views

    Abad Vs Biason

    Uploaded by

    Alex Gracia
    The Supreme Court ruled that the guardianship of Leonardo Biason over Maura B. Abad was terminated upon Biason's death. Eduardo Abad had petitioned to be Maura's guardian but the trial court appointed Biason instead, which the appellate court affirmed. However, while Abad's appeal to the Supreme Court was pending, Biason died. The Court held that a guardian-ward relationship ends with the death of either party, so Biason's death rendered the issues in the case moot. As Maura demonstrated she could manage her own affairs, the Court dismissed the case and terminated the guardianship.

    Copyright:

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

    Abad Vs Biason

    Uploaded by

    Alex Gracia
    41 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the guardianship of Leonardo Biason over Maura B. Abad was terminated upon Biason's death. Eduardo Abad had petitioned to be Maura's guardian but the trial court appointed Biason instead, which the appellate court affirmed. However, while Abad's appeal to the Supreme Court was pending, Biason died. The Court held that a guardian-ward relationship ends with the death of either party, so Biason's death rendered the issues in the case moot. As Maura demonstrated she could manage her own affairs, the Court dismissed the case and terminated the guardianship.

    Original Title

    263264594-Abad-vs-Biason.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the guardianship of Leonardo Biason over Maura B. Abad was terminated upon Biason's death. Eduardo Abad had petitioned to be Maura's guardian but the trial court appointed Biason instead, which the appellate court affirmed. However, while Abad's appeal to the Supreme Court was pending, Biason died. The Court held that a guardian-ward relationship ends with the death of either party, so Biason's death rendered the issues in the case moot. As Maura demonstrated she could manage her own affairs, the Court dismissed the case and terminated the guardianship.

    Copyright:

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

    Abad Vs Biason

    Uploaded by

    Alex Gracia
    The Supreme Court ruled that the guardianship of Leonardo Biason over Maura B. Abad was terminated upon Biason's death. Eduardo Abad had petitioned to be Maura's guardian but the trial court appointed Biason instead, which the appellate court affirmed. However, while Abad's appeal to the Supreme Court was pending, Biason died. The Court held that a guardian-ward relationship ends with the death of either party, so Biason's death rendered the issues in the case moot. As Maura demonstrated she could manage her own affairs, the Court dismissed the case and terminated the guardianship.

    Copyright:

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

    EDUARDO T.

    ABAD, Petitioner, 
    vs.
    LEONARDO BIASON and GABRIEL A. MAGNO, Respondents.

    G.R. No. 191993               December 5, 2012

    FACTS: The facts show that on March 19, 2007, petitioner Eduardo Abad (Abad) filed a petition for
    guardianship over the person and properties of Maura B. Abad (Maura) with the RTC Dagupan. In support
    thereof, Abad alleged that he maintains residence at No. 14 B St. Paul Street, Horseshoe Village, Quezon City
    and that he is Maura’s nephew. He averred that Maura, who is single, more than ninety (90) years old and a
    resident of Rizal Street, Poblacion, Mangaldan, Pangasinan, is in dire need of a guardian who will look after
    her and her business affairs. Due to her advanced age, Maura is already sickly and can no longer manage to
    take care of herself and her properties unassisted thus becoming an easy prey of deceit and exploitation.
    Finding the petition sufficient in form and substance, the RTC gave due course to the same and scheduled it
    for hearing. When the petition was called for hearing on April 27, 2007, nobody entered an opposition and
    Abad was allowed to present evidence ex parte. After Abad formally offered his evidence and the case was
    submitted for decision, Atty. Gabriel Magno filed a Motion for Leave to Intervene, together with an
    Oppositionin- Intervention. Subsequently, on June 14, 2007, Leonardo Biason (Biason) filed a Motion for
    Leave to File Opposition to the Petition and attached therewith his Opposition to the Appointment of
    Eduardo Abad as Guardian of the Person and Properties of Maura B. Abad. Specifically, Biason alleged that he
    is also a nephew of Maura and that he was not notified of the pendency of the petition for the appointment
    of the latter’s guardian. He vehemently opposed the appointment of Abad as Maura’s guardian as he cannot
    possibly perform his duties as such since he resides in Quezon City while Maura maintains her abode in
    Mangaldan, Pangasinan. Biason prayed that he be appointed as Maura’s guardian since he was previously
    granted by the latter with a power of attorney to manage her properties. RTC rendered a decision, denying
    Abad’s petition and appointing Biason as Maura’s guardian. CA affirmed the decision on the RTC. Abad filed a
    Review on Certiorari with the SC. Unfortunately, pending the resolution of the petition, Biason died. Maura
    averred  that Biason’s death rendered moot and academic the issues raised in the petition. She thus prayed
    that the petition be dismissed and the guardianship be terminated. Abad expressed his acquiescence to
    Maura’s motion to dismiss the petition. He asseverated that the issues raised in the petition pertain to the
    irregularity in the appointment of Biason as guardian which he believed had been rendered moot and
    academic by the latter’s death. He also supported Maura’s prayer for the termination of the guardianship by
    asseverating that her act of filing of a petition-in-intervention is indicative of the fact that she is of sound
    mind and that she can competently manage her business affairs.

    ISSUE: Whether or not guardianship is terminated upon the death of Biason

    HELD: Yes.  It is a well-established rule that the relationship of guardian and ward is necessarily terminated by
    the death of either the guardian or the ward. The supervening event of death rendered it pointless to delve
    into the propriety of Biason’s appointment since the juridical tie between him and Maura has already been
    dissolved. The petition, regardless of its disposition, will not afford Abad, or anyone else for that matter, any
    substantial relief.

    You might also like