8/9/2019 15. LEYNES Vda de Catalan v Catalan-Lee

1/2

MEROPE ENRIQUEZ VDA. DE CATALAN, - versus -LOUELLA A. CATALAN-LEE,Feb. 8, 2012ere!"D#$es% b& Eu$e!#" Le&!esNote: The case cited and quoted the case of Garcia v. Recio which contained the important ratio. Lookat that part.

Topic and Provisions: Ofcial Records

F'(%s)

Case is or issuance o letters o administration o the intestate estate o Orlando B. Catalan.

Orlando Catalan naturalized American citizen.

Ater allegedl o!taining a divorce in the "# rom his $rst %ie& 'elicitas Amor& he contracted asecond marriage %ith petitioner herein.

() *ov +,,- Orlando died intestate in the Philippines.

+) 'e! +,, Petitioner $led a Petition or the issuance o letters o administration or herappointment as administratri/ o the intestate estate o Orlando.

0 1ar +,, respondent 2one o the children rom Orlando3s $rst marriage4& $led a similarpetition.

Respondent alleged that petitioner %as not considered an interested person 5uali$ed to $le apetition or the issuance o letters o administration o the estate o Orlando.

o 6n support o her contention& respondent alleged that a criminal case or !igam %as$led against petitioner& '**e$#!$ %+'% e%#%#"!er ("!%r'(%e ' se("! 'rr#'$e %"Or*'!" es#%e +'v#!$ bee! 'rr#e %" "!e Euseb#" /r#s%"* "! 12 De(eber1.

7 Aug (88) RTC ac5uitted petitioner o !igam on the ground that the deceased %as adivorced American citizen& and s#!(e %+e e(e'se 's ' #v"r(e Aer#('! (#%#3e!, '!s#!(e %+'% #v"r(e 's !"% re("$!#3e u!er P+#*##!e 4ur#s#(%#"!, %+e 'rr#'$ebe%ee! +# '! e%#%#"!er 's !"% v'*#.

o 'urthermore& the court ound that petitioner had never !een married to 9use!io Bristol.

+7 une +,,7& Petition or the issuance o letters o administration $led ! petitioner %asdismissed.

o ;ithout e/pounding& it reasoned urther that her ac5uittal in the previous !igam case

%as atal to her cause. Thus& the trial court held that petitioner %as not an interestedpart %ho ma $le a petition or the issuance o letters o administration.

CA denied appeal.

Issue)15 ;O* Petitioner has proven her divorce %ith 9use!io Bristol& allo%ing her to validl marr

the deceased.6e*)

(4 *o. 9vidence o the ofcial documents o divorce %as not presented.D#s"s#%#ve) ;

8/9/2019 15. LEYNES Vda de Catalan v Catalan-Lee

2/2

o "nder #ections +- and + o Rule (0+& on the other hand& a %riting or document ma!e proven as a pu!lic or ofcial record o a oreign countr ! either

2(4 an ofcial pu!lication or

2+4 a cop thereo attested ! the ofcer having legal custod o the

document.o 6 the record is not Dept in the Philippines& such cop must !e

2a4 accompanied ! a certi$cate issued ! the proper diplomatic or consular

ofcer in the Philippine oreign service stationed in the oreign countr in %hichthe record is Dept and

2!4 authenticated ! the seal o his ofce.

o The divorce decree !et%een respondent and 9ditha #amson appears to !e anauthentic one issued ! an Australian amil court.