TOMAS Corpus vs.

RAFAEL Corpus
85 SCRA 567
FACTS:
RAMONA ARGUELLES and TOMAS CORPUS were married, blessed with 5 children:
PABLO CORPUS, JOSE CORPUS and 3 others. When TOMAS CORPUS DIED,
RAMONA wed LUIS RAFAEL YANGCO and had 4 recognized acknowledged natural
children, one of them was the decedent TEORORO YANGCO.
TEODORO Yangco died on April 20, 1939. His will was dated August 29, 1934 and was
probated 1941. At the time of his death, he had no forced heirs. He only had his half brother
(LUIS YANGCO), half sister (PAZ YANGCO), wife of Miguel Ossorio (AMALIA
CORPUS), the children of his half brother Pablo Corpus (JOSE and RAMON) and the
daughter of his half brother Jose Corpus (JUANA/JUANITA CORPUS). Juanita died in
1944.
Pursuant to the order of the probate court, a project of partition dated November 26, 1945 was
submitted by the administrator and the legatees named in the will. The said project was
contested by the following, on the following grounds (oppositors):
> Estate of LUIS YANGCO: intestacy should be declared because the will does not contain
an institution of heir
> JUANITA Corpus, PEDRO MARTINEZ and JULIANA DE CASTO, through ATTY.
CRUZ: the proposed partition was not in conformity with the will as the testator intended
that the estate should be CONSERVED and not physically parititoned.
Nevertheless, the project of partition was approved by the Probate court, in essence holding
that the testator did not really intend to a perpetual prohibition against alienation when he
stated that some of his estate be conserved.
Oppositors appealed to SC but appeal dismissed after the legatees and the appellants entered
into compromise agreements wherein the legatees agreed to pay P35k to PEDRO
MARTINEZ, the heirs of PIO CORPUS, the heirs of ISABEL CORPUS, and the heir of
JUANITA CORPUS her son TOMAS CORPUS. For the estate of Luis Yangco, a similar
compromise agreement was entered. The dismissal of the appeal became final and executory.
Pursuant to the compromise agreement, Tomas Corpus signed a receipt acknowledging that
he received from the Yangco estate P2k as settlement in full of my share of the compromise
agreement as per understanding with Judge Roman Cruz, our attorney in this case. The
legatees executed an agreement for the settlement and physical partition of the Yangco estate
which was approved by the probate court in 1949. 1945 project of partition was pro tanto
modified.
TOMAS CORPUS still filed action to recover JUANITAs supposed share in Yangcos
intestate estate, alleging that the dispositions in Yangcos will sing perpetual prohibitions
upon alienation which rendered it void under A785, OCC and that 1949 partition is invalid.
The decedents estate should have been distributed according to the rules on intestacy.

TC: DISMISS: Res Judicata and laches.

-directly appealed to SC
-Petitioners contention: trial court erred in holding (1) Teodoro Yangco was a natural child;
(2) Teodoro Yangcos will had been duly legalized; (3) Plaintiffs action is barred by res
judicata and laches.
ISSUE:
WON JUANITA CORPUS, TOMAS CORPUS mom, was a legal heir of TEODORO
YANGCO so that his mom would have a cause of action to recover a supposed intestate share
in the estate.
(the court deemed it unnecessary to determine if the will has been duly legalized and whether
his action has already been barred by laches)
HELD: NO. JUANITA CORPUS, the petitioners mother, was NOT A LEGAL HEIR of
Yangco because there is NO RECIPROCAL SUCCESSION between legitimate and
illegitimate relatives.
NCC: An illegitimate child has no right to inherit ab intestate from the legitimate children
and relatives of his father or mother; nor shall such children or relatives inherit in the same
manner from the legitimate child. A992 is based on the theory that the illegitimate child is
disgracefully looked upon by the legitimate family while the legitimate family is, in turn,
hated by the legitimate child. The Law does not recognize blood tie and seeks to avoid further
grounds of resentment.
TEODORO YANGCO, and 3 other children, was ACKNOWLEDGED NATURAL CHILD
and NOT A LEGITIMATE CHILD, of LUIS RAFAEL YANGCO and RAMONA
ARGUELLES. JOSE CORPUSwas the presumed legitimate child of TOMAS CORPUS and
RAMONA ARGUELLES. Therefore, TOMAS CORPUS (Petitioner) had no cause of action
for the recovery of the supposed hereditary share of his mother, JUANITA CORPUS, as legal
heir in YANGCOs estate.
-Legitimate relatives of the mother cannot succeed her illegitimate child.
-The natural child cannot represent his natural father in the succession to the estate of the
legitimate grandparent.
-The natural daughter cannot succeed to the estate of her deceased uncle, a legitimate brother
of her natural mother.
Disposition. WHEREFORE the lower court's judgment is affirmed. No costs. SO
ORDERED.