Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
(a) Whether or not Teran, the former appointed guardian and administrator of the
minors estate, is liable for the debts incurred of the estate from March 1902 to
October 1906 when Munoz-Gomez was appointed as the actual administrator?
The Court ruled that Teran is NOT liable. If any loss occurred to herein petitioner
from March 1902 to October 1906, the period wherein Munoz-Gomez was
appointed administrator, he has a right of action only against Munoz-Gomez as the
appointed legal guardian under the law and the administratix of the property of
their estate.
The administrator of an estate belonging to minors is liable for the
management of their interests therein from the time of his acceptance of the
appointment until his removal or release. If such administrator has, in the
meantime, permitted other persons to intervene in the management, the
responsibility for their acts fall upon him.
(b) Whether or not Maria Munoz appointment was void because she did not reside
in the Philippine islands at the time of her appointment as the guardian.
While there is nothing in the law which requires the courts to appoint
residents only as administrators or guardians; however, the courts, charged with the
responsibility of protecting the estates of the deceased persons, wards of the estate,
will find much difficulty in complying with this duty by appointing administrators
and guardians who are not personally subject to their jurisdiction. Notwithstanding
the lack of statutory requirement, the courts should not consent to the appointment
of persons as administrators and guardians who are not personally subject to the
jurisdiction of the court.