Gotamco v. Seng

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. No. 22737 November 28, 1924 Estate of the deceased Antonio Tanpoco. VICENTE GOTAMCO, administrator, vs. CHAN SENG, guardian of Tan Kim Choo, opponent-appellee; JOSE RAZON, guardian ad litem of the minor Tan Kim Hong, appellant. Eiguren and Razon for appellant.

Gibbs & McDonough for appellee. STATEMENT Antonio Tanpoco died in the year 1920 and left a will dividing his estate of over P300,000 among four sons, one-half of which he bequeathed to Tan Kim Hong, the claimant, whom he described in his will as his legitimate son, and the other half he left in equal shares to his three adopted sons, Tan Kimco. Tan Kimbio and Tan Kim Choo, and appointed Go Siu San, a resident of Manila, as executor of his will, which provided that no bond should be required.

November 22, 1920, two Chinese named Tan Kim Lay and Te Sue, one of Tarlac and the other of Manila, were appointed and qualified as commissioners, and later they published the usual notice to creditors to present their claims within six months at the office of Attorney M. G. Goyena, of Manila. June 29, 1921, the commissioners presented their report to the court in which, among others, they reported the allowance of the claim here in question. At the time all of the heirs, including Tan Kim Hong, were minors and had lived in China since the death of Antonio Tanpoco, as also had the widow of the deceased.

On June 29, 1921, the date the commissioners' report was filed, the executed filed a motion asking for the appointment of an attorney of his own choice as curador ad litem for the minor heirs which, among other things, recites as follows: 2. That the heirs who are interested in the estate of the above entitled action are all minors, to wit: Tan Kimco, age 20; Tan Kim Hong, age 12; Tan Kimbio, age 11; and Tan Kim Choo, age 4; and that all the above heirs are now in China, and the day of their return to the Islands is unknown to the administrator of the estate. The court ignored request of the executor, and on July 2, 1921, upon its own motion, appointed Mr. Felipe Canillas, who treated his appointed as a formality and did not make any investigation of the facts, and hence the report of the commissioners was approved on July 14, 1922.

During all of this time the minor heirs were still in China. In September, 1922, they arrived in Manila and employed counsel to represent and protect their interest, and it was then that Chan Seng learned for the first time of the allowance of the claim in favor of Tan Kim Hong. Upon her motion, on November 27, 1922, Judge Harvey ordered an investigation of the administration of Go Siu San as executor, which was made by Mr. Felipe Canillas, who still held the position of curador ad litem of all the minor heirs, including the claimant, who made a written report to the court, the material portion of which is as follows: In the salary ledger of 1920 there appears to have been credited, without expressing their origin, in favor of Tan Kim Hong the following sums: January 25 .........................................

P20,000.00 February 7 ......................................... 10,000.00 February 13 ........................................ 10,000.00 Total ..............................................