G.R. No. L-14856; November 15, 1919
ENCARNACION FLORENTINO, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. MERCEDES FLORENTINO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.

FACTS:
Apolonio Isabelo Florentino II died in 1890, survived by his second wife, Severina Faz de Leon, and children from two marriages. Among his children was a posthumous son, Apolonio III, who inherited property from his father. Apolonio III died in 1891, and his mother, Severina, inherited his property. Severina later died in 1908, leaving a will that instituted her only surviving daughter, Mercedes Florentino (defendant), as her universal heiress. Mercedes thus took possession of all property left by Severina, including the property Severina had inherited from Apolonio III.

The plaintiffs, who are relatives of Apolonio III within the third degree (siblings and nephews/nieces), filed an action claiming that the property inherited by Severina from Apolonio III was “reservable property” under Article 811 of the Civil Code. They argued that as reservatarios (those entitled to the reversion), they were entitled to shares of this property, which should not have passed entirely to Mercedes. The defendants demurred, contending that since Mercedes was Severina’s forced heir, the property lost its reservable character and properly formed part of Mercedes’s legitime. The trial court sustained the demurrer and dismissed the complaint.

ISSUE:
Whether the property inherited by Severina Faz de Leon from her son Apolonio III is subject to a legal reserve (reservable property) under Article 811 of the Civil Code, in favor of Apolonio III’s relatives within the third degree, even though Severina’s sole heir is her forced heir, Mercedes Florentino.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s order.

The property inherited by Severina from her son Apolonio III is reservable property under Article 811 of the Civil Code. The obligation to reserve such property is imposed on the ascendant (Severina) who inherits from a descendant (Apolonio III) for the benefit of relatives within the third degree belonging to the line from which the property came. This obligation is not extinguished merely because the reservista (Severina) has a forced heir. The reservable property does not form part of the reservista’s own estate for the purpose of computing the legitime of her forced heirs. Therefore, Mercedes, as Severina’s forced heir, could not claim the entire reservable property to the exclusion of other reservatarios.

The plaintiffs, as relatives of Apolonio III within the third degree, are reservatarios entitled to the property. The Court declared the property reservable and adjudicated six-sevenths (6/7) of it to the plaintiffs collectively, with the remaining one-seventh (1/7) going to the defendant Mercedes Florentino. The defendants were ordered to deliver to the plaintiffs six-sevenths of the fruits or rents from the property, reckoned from the filing of the complaint. The claim for indemnity for damages was denied.