G.R. No. L-53650 and L-55460. May 28, 1988.
VIRGINIA M. RAMOS, petitioner, vs. HON. JUDGE ABDULWAHID A. BIDIN, COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ZAMBOANGA CITY, BRANCH I, respondent. ROSAURA P. JALDON, petitioner, vs. HON. JUDGE ABDULWAHID A. BIDIN, COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ZAMBOANGA CITY, BRANCH I, and VIRGINIA M. RAMOS, respondents.

FACTS

These consolidated petitions for certiorari seek to annul portions of the CFI Zamboanga orders dated May 8, 1979, October 5, 1979, and March 14, 1980, relating to attorney’s fees in the estate settlement of Felixberto D. Jaldon. The administratrix, Rosaura Jaldon, initially engaged Atty. Abelardo Fernandez, whose services were terminated in 1977. He later filed a claim for attorney’s fees. Subsequently, the administratrix engaged Atty. Virginia Ramos as new counsel. Ramos manifested in court a written contract fixing her fee at 5% of the estate value. Rosemarie Jaldon, an adopted daughter, opposed both claims, arguing half the fees should be charged personally to the administratrix for alleged dereliction of duty.
The respondent judge, by order of May 8, 1979, awarded attorney’s fees on a quantum meruit basis: P50,000 to Fernandez and P25,000 to Ramos, chargeable against the estate. Ramos moved for reconsideration, presenting her 5% contract. On October 5, 1979, the judge increased her award to P40,000 but refused to enforce the contract, reasoning it was too late to consider it without injustice to Fernandez, who had accepted his award. Ramos filed G.R. No. L-53650, alleging grave abuse of discretion for ignoring her contract. Subsequently, on March 14, 1980, the court ordered the estate’s partition but directed that sums for the attorney’s fees awards be set aside from sale proceeds, with a portion of Ramos’s claim deposited pending her appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the respondent court acted with grave abuse of discretion in awarding attorney’s fees to Atty. Virginia Ramos without a formal claim filed in the estate proceedings and by disregarding her express contract with the administratrix.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petitions and set aside the challenged orders. The Court held that the respondent court exceeded its jurisdiction in awarding attorney’s fees to Ramos. The proper procedure for claiming such fees against an estate is mandated by the Rules of Court. An attorney claiming compensation for services rendered to an executor or administrator must either: (1) file a formal claim in the estate proceedings, with notice to all interested parties, for allowance as an administration expense; or (2) sue the administrator personally, after which the administrator may seek reimbursement from the estate by including the amount in her final account. Ramos pursued neither course. She did not file a claim in the special proceedings; instead, she merely presented her contract during a motion for reconsideration. The lower court therefore had no jurisdiction to adjudicate her fees sua sponte. The award, even if based on quantum meruit, was void for lack of a proper claim. The existence of a private contract between Ramos and the administratrix does not alter this procedural requirement, as the claim is ultimately against the estate’s assets. The Court remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court for further proceedings, noting Ramos could still file a proper claim in the estate proceedings. The ruling emphasizes strict adherence to procedural rules in estate settlement to protect the interests of all heirs