G.R. No. L-14157; October 26, 1960
Municipalities of Magallon, Isabela and La Castellana, Negros Occidental, petitioners-appellees, vs. Ignatius Henry Bezore, et al., oppositors-heirs appellants.

FACTS

The Municipalities of Magallon, La Castellana, and Isabela in Negros Occidental filed escheat proceedings in the Court of First Instance, seeking to have the estates of the deceased Anne Fallon Murphy and Tomas (Thomas) Fallon (married to Julia Fallon) escheated in their favor. The properties consisted of agricultural lands, residential lots, and accrued rentals. The estates originally belonged to Charles J. Fallon, an American citizen married to Rosario Santaromana. Upon his death in 1935, his wife inherited one-half in ownership and the other half in usufruct. After Rosario’s death in 1943, the usufructuary portion passed to Charles’s siblings, Thomas Fallon and Anne Fallon Murphy. The petitioners believed Thomas and Anne, residents of the United States, had died without heirs. Evidence established that Anne Fallon Murphy died on March 12, 1936, in San Francisco, California; Thomas Fallon died on May 26, 1936, also in San Francisco; and his wife, Julia Fallon, died on December 2, 1944, in San Francisco. Opposition was filed by Ignatius Henry Bezore (claiming to be a nephew as his mother was the decedents’ sister), Elwood Knickerbocker (claiming as sole legatee of his wife Loreta, who was the residuary legatee of Anne Fallon Murphy), and Mary Irene Fallon McCormick (claiming to be a niece as her father was the decedents’ brother). They sought dismissal of the escheat petition and distribution of the properties among themselves. The lower court denied the escheat petition, finding that Thomas Fallon died with an heir (his wife Julia) and that Anne Fallon Murphy died leaving a will disposing of all her properties. The court also denied the oppositors’ prayers to be declared heirs, finding their evidence insufficient. The petitioners did not appeal, but the oppositors appealed the denial of their claims.

ISSUE

Whether the lower court, in the escheat proceedings, erred in not rendering judgment in favor of the oppositors and declaring them as heirs of the decedents.

RULING

No, the appeal cannot be entertained. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s decision. The proceedings were instituted specifically as escheat proceedings, not for the settlement of estates. The court acquired jurisdiction only over the escheat petition through its publication. This jurisdiction cannot be converted into one for the distribution of the decedents’ properties. For such distribution proceedings to be proper, the correct parties must initiate them in compliance with the requirements of the Rules of Court. Therefore, the Court of First Instance had no power to order the distribution of the estates or adjudicate the properties to the oppositors within these escheat proceedings. The decision was affirmed without costs.