G.R. No. 102372 November 15, 1994
FLAVIANO S. GASPAY, JR., AND ERIBERTA S. GASPAY, petitioners, vs. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS AND GUADALUPE GASPAY ALFARO, respondents.

FACTS

Flaviano Gaspay died intestate in 1983. In 1988, private respondent Guadalupe Gaspay Alfaro filed a petition for letters of administration, claiming to be his acknowledged illegitimate daughter. Petitioners Flaviano Gaspay, Jr. (an adopted son) and Eriberta Gaspay opposed, arguing Alfaro was a stranger with no proof of recognition. The trial court dismissed Alfaro’s petition, finding her evidence insufficient and ruling that an action for compulsory recognition must be filed during the putative father’s lifetime.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court. It found the evidence, particularly two letters (Exhibits “K” and “L”) written by the decedent, sufficient to prove Alfaro’s filiation and the decedent’s voluntary acknowledgment. It also held that actions based on voluntary acknowledgment can be instituted after the father’s death. Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court via certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in: (1) re-evaluating the credibility of a witness and the weight of evidence; (2) ruling that an action based on voluntary acknowledgment can be filed after the putative parent’s death; and (3) finding Alfaro entitled to letters of administration.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the Court of Appeals. On the first issue, the appellate court did not err in exhaustively examining the evidence, including the testimony of witness Martin Garin, as the key factual issue on appeal was whether the evidence proved recognition. The Court sustained the appellate court’s assessment that Garin was a competent witness who properly identified the decedent’s handwriting in the critical letters, which contained clear statements of acknowledgment.
On the second issue, the Court upheld the legal principle that an action to claim rights arising from voluntary acknowledgment can be filed even after the death of the acknowledging parent. This is distinct from an action for compulsory recognition. The letters constituted voluntary acknowledgment, and Alfaro’s use of the surname “Gaspay” and her conduct constituted consent to such acknowledgment.
On the third issue, given that Alfaro successfully proved she was an acknowledged illegitimate child and thus a next of kin, and considering that the petitioners neglected to apply for administration within thirty days after the decedent’s death, the Court of Appeals correctly ruled that she was entitled to letters of administration under Section 6, Rule 78 of the Rules of Court. No reversible error was committed.