G.R. No. L‑3534
December 4 1906

FACTS
– Plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of the deceased To‑Tico, sued Lorenzo del Rosario for ₱30,000, alleging his negligence caused To‑Tico’s death.
– The trial court entered judgment against del Rosario for ₱3,000 (16 July 1906).
– Del Rosario moved for a new trial (denied 4 August 1906); a bill of exceptions was filed (18 August 1906).
– Del Rosario died on 15 August 1906.
– Plaintiff moved before the Supreme Court to (a) substitute the special administratrix of del Rosario’s estate as defendant (denied 15 October 1906) and (b) suspend the appeal so the claim could be presented to the estate’s commissioners.

ISSUE
Whether, after the death of a defendant post‑judgment but before final resolution of an appeal, the plaintiff may substitute the general administrator of the deceased’s estate for the defendant and continue the action, or whether substitution is barred because a “special administratrix” cannot be made a party.

RULING
The Court held that:

1. A special administratrix cannot be substituted as a defendant in the appeal (the motion was denied on that ground).
2. The prohibition of substitution does not extend to a general administrator. Citing Azarraga v. Cortes (Nov 21 1906), the Court affirmed that when a defendant dies after a final judgment, Section 119 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not prevent the action on appeal from proceeding against the general administrator of the estate.
3. Accordingly, the plaintiff may petition for substitution of the general administrator, but the specific motion to substitute the special administratrix was denied.

Disposition Motion for substitution of the special administratrix denied; plaintiff may seek substitution of the general administrator.

Concurrences: Chief Justice Arellano and Justices Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Carson, and Tracey.