Case Digest: Article 381-385 of Family Code (Jones vs. Hortiguela)

In re Instate of the deceased Marciana Escaño. ANGELITA JONES., petitioner-appellant-appellee, vs. FELIX HORTIGUELA, as administrator, widower and heir, oppositor-appellant-appellee.

G.R. No. L-43701 March 6, 1937

CONCEPCION, J.:

Facts: In December 1914, Marciana Escaño and Arthur Jones got married. On January 10, 1918, Jones secured a passport, left and never came back. In 1919, Escano filed a proceeding to judicially declare that Arthur is missing.

On October 25, 1919, the court declared Arthur as an absentee with the proviso that said judicial declaration of absence would not take effect until six months after its publication in the official newspapers pursuant to Art. 186 of the Old Civil Code.

On April 23, 1921, the court issued another order for the taking effect of the declaration of absence, publication thereof having been made in the Official Gazette and in "El Ideal”.

On May 6, 1927, Marciana contracted a second marriage with Felix Hortiguela. When Marciana died intestate, Felix was appointed as judicial administrator of the estate.

Angelita Jones, Marciana’s daughter from her first marriage, filed a case and alleged that she is the only heir of her mother and that her mother’s marriage to Felix was null and void on the ground that it was below seven year prescriptive period from the date when court issued another order for the taking effect of the declaration of absence to the time of the celebration of the subsequent marriage.

Issue: Whether or not Felix is a legitimate heir and administrator of Marciana.

Held: Yes. The subsequent marriage between Escaño and Hortiguela was valid. The absence of Marciana Escaño's former husband should be counted from the date on which the last news concerning Arthur W. Jones was received, from January 10, 1918 to May 6, 1927. It is more than 7 years prescriptive period. Thus, the validity of the marriage made Felix a legitimate heir and administrator to part of estate.