GR 109979; (March, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 109979 March 11, 1999
RICARDO C. SILVERIO, SR., petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, SPECIAL SEVENTH DIVISION, HON. FRANCISCO X. VELEZ, Presiding Judge, RTC, Makati, Branch 57 and EDGARDO S. SILVERIO, respondents.
FACTS
Beatriz Silverio died intestate in 1987, survived by her husband, Ricardo Silverio, Sr., and their children. In 1990, her son Edgardo Silverio filed a Petition for Letters of Administration. The trial court appointed Edgardo as Special Administrator. Ricardo Sr. filed an Opposition. During the proceedings, Ricardo Sr. sought a postponement of the hearing for the reception of his evidence, citing a settlement conference in a case in California. The trial court denied the motion, declared Ricardo Sr. to have waived his right to present evidence, and subsequently appointed Edgardo as the regular administrator. Ricardo Sr. challenged these orders via certiorari, arguing the denial of his motion was a denial of due process and that the judge should have inhibited for bias.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the trial court acted with grave abuse of discretion in declaring Ricardo Silverio, Sr. to have waived his right to present evidence and in appointing Edgardo Silverio as regular administrator.
RULING
The Supreme Court found no grave abuse of discretion. The right to present evidence is not absolute and can be waived by a party’s failure to avail themselves of it. The records showed a pattern of delay by Ricardo Sr., who had never personally appeared since filing his Opposition. The trial court’s order noted assurances from his counsel that he would return from abroad for the hearing, which were not fulfilled. The denial of the last-minute motion for postponement, under these circumstances, was a reasonable exercise of judicial discretion to prevent further undue delay. The appointment of Edgardo as regular administrator was proper under Section 6, Rule 78 of the Rules of Court, which grants preference to the next of kin. As a son, Edgardo was competent and willing to serve. The surviving spouse, Ricardo Sr., had neglected for over three years to apply for administration, justifying the grant to a next of kin. The Court also found the claim of judicial bias unsubstantiated, as mere allegations without factual support do not constitute a valid reason for inhibition. The trial court’s actions were within its sound discretion and did not amount to a capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment.