Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 67 views

    Ilusorio Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Sittenor Abdul
    1. Erlinda Ilusorio filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking custody of her husband Potenciano who left their home to live with their children. The CA denied Erlinda's petition. 2. The case considers whether habeas corpus can be used to compel a husband to live with his wife, and whether visitation rights were properly awarded. 3. The Supreme Court ruled that habeas corpus cannot be used to enforce conjugal living or coverture, which is a matter of personal choice. It also found that the CA erred in awarding visitation rights which were not requested.

    Copyright:

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

    Ilusorio Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Sittenor Abdul
    67 views2 pages
    1. Erlinda Ilusorio filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking custody of her husband Potenciano who left their home to live with their children. The CA denied Erlinda's petition. 2. The case considers whether habeas corpus can be used to compel a husband to live with his wife, and whether visitation rights were properly awarded. 3. The Supreme Court ruled that habeas corpus cannot be used to enforce conjugal living or coverture, which is a matter of personal choice. It also found that the CA erred in awarding visitation rights which were not requested.

    Original Title

    Ilusorio case digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Erlinda Ilusorio filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking custody of her husband Potenciano who left their home to live with their children. The CA denied Erlinda's petition. 2. The case considers whether habeas corpus can be used to compel a husband to live with his wife, and whether visitation rights were properly awarded. 3. The Supreme Court ruled that habeas corpus cannot be used to enforce conjugal living or coverture, which is a matter of personal choice. It also found that the CA erred in awarding visitation rights which were not requested.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    67 views2 pages

    Ilusorio Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Sittenor Abdul
    1. Erlinda Ilusorio filed a petition for habeas corpus seeking custody of her husband Potenciano who left their home to live with their children. The CA denied Erlinda's petition. 2. The case considers whether habeas corpus can be used to compel a husband to live with his wife, and whether visitation rights were properly awarded. 3. The Supreme Court ruled that habeas corpus cannot be used to enforce conjugal living or coverture, which is a matter of personal choice. It also found that the CA erred in awarding visitation rights which were not requested.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Ilusorio vs Bildner (Ilusorio vs CA GR No 139808) GR No

    139789 12 May 2000
    Facts: This is a consolidated case of the following:
    1. Petitioner (P) Erlinda Ilusorio seeks to reverse the Decision of the CA dismissing her
    application for habeas corpus to have the custody of her husband, lawyer Potenciano
    Ilusorio (Respondent, “R” for brevity) and enforce consortium.
    2. Potenciano filed a petition to annul the portion of the Decision of the CA giving
    visitation rights her wife Erlinda to her.
    Potenciano is about 86 years of age, possessed extensive properties valued at millions of
    pesos. He was, for many years, the Chairman of the Board and President of Baguio Country
    Club.

    Erlinda and Potenciano are married couple but they separated from bed and board for
    undisclosed reasons. They have six (6) children (co-respondents).

    On December 30, 1997, Potenciano arrived coming from USA here in the Philippines. He
    stayed for five (5) months with Erlinda in Antipolo City. The children, Sylvia and Erlinda,
    alleged that during such time, Erlinda gave Potenciano an overdosed amount of Zoloft
    (instead of 100mg, she gave 200mg); thus, Potenciano’s health deteriorated.

    On February 25, 1998, Erlinda filed with the RTC of Antipolo a petition for Guardianship over
    the person and property of Potenciano due to latters advanced age, frail health, poor
    eyesight and impaired judgment.

    On May 31, 1998, After attending a corporate meeting, Potenciano did not return to his wife
    in Antipolo but rather he went and lived at Makati with his children.

    Because of such event, Erlinda filed a petition with the CA for habeas corpus to have the
    custody of her lawyer husband, Potenciano. CA denied such petition.

    Issues:
    1. Whether habeas corpus may be availed by Erlinda to compel Potenciano to live with
    her in conjugal bliss?
    2. How about the issue of visitation rights?
    Decision:
    1. Marital rights including overture and living in conjugal dwelling may not be enforced
    by the extra-ordinary writ of habeas corpus.
    No court is empowered as a judicial authority to compel a husband to live with his wife.
    Coverture cannot be enforced by compulsion of a writ of habeas corpus carried out by
    sheriffs or by any other means process. That is a matter beyond judicial authority and is
    best left to the man and woman’s free choice.

    2. CA exceeded its authority when it awarded visitation rights in a petition for habeas
    corpus because P never prayed for such right.
    In this case, Potenciano was found to be of sound mind and possesses the capacity to make
    own choices.

    With his full mental capacity coupled with the right of choice, Potenciano may not be the
    subject of visitation rights against his free choice. Otherwise, we will deprive him of his right
    to privacy.

    You might also like