G.R. No. 47799; June 13, 1941
ELEUTERIO NERI, ET AL., petitioners, vs. IGNACIA AKUTIN AND HER CHILDREN, respondents.

FACTS

Agripino Neri y Chavez died on December 12, 1931. He had six children from his first marriage (Eleuterio, Agripino, Agapito, Getulia, Rosario, and Celerina) and five children from his second marriage to Ignacia Akutin (Gracia, Godofredo, Violeta, Estela Maria, and Emma). Getulia, a child from the first marriage, predeceased Agripino on October 2, 1923, and was survived by her seven children. In his will, Agripino stated that his children from the first marriage should have no further share in his estate, as he believed they had already received their corresponding shares during his lifetime. The will was admitted to probate. The trial court, however, declared all children from both marriages as intestate heirs, reserving one-half of the improvements made during the second conjugal partnership for Ignacia Akutin. The Court of Appeals affirmed but modified, holding the will valid with respect to the two-thirds of the estate the testator could freely dispose of. Petitioners seek review of this judgment.

ISSUE

Whether the omission (preterition) of the forced heirs (the children from the first marriage and the grandchildren representing their predeceased mother) from the will annuls the institution of the children from the second marriage as sole heirs, or whether the will remains valid at least for the portions available for free disposal (legacy and betterment).

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and affirmed the trial court’s decision. The case involves preterition, not ineffective disinheritance. Preterition occurs when a forced heir in the direct line is omitted from the will—either not mentioned or, though mentioned, is neither instituted as an heir nor expressly disinherited. Here, the children from the first marriage were mentioned in the will but were given no share and were not expressly disinherited; the testator’s denial was based on the mistaken belief they had already received their shares via advancement. This constitutes preterition. Under Article 814 of the Civil Code, the preterition of one or all forced heirs in the direct line annuls the institution of heirs, leading to intestate succession, except that legacies and betterments remain valid if not inofficious. In this will, there were no express legacies or betterments made in favor of the children from the second marriage; the entire estate was given to them based on a mistake. Had the testator not been mistaken, his clear intention, as inferred from the will, would have been to divide his property equally among all his children. Therefore, the institution of heirs is void, and the estate shall be distributed by intestate succession to all forced heirs, without prejudice to the widow’s legal usufruct.