Garcia v.

Escudero (43 Phil 437) Facts: Verdejo died, leaving an open will wherein he named as heirs his three sisters (Garcia, et al.), and Escudero and Marasigan as administrators. Intestate proceedings were commenced in the justice of the peace court of Dolores for the settlement of the deceaseds estate undisposed of by will, and testamentary proceedings leading to the settlement of the estate covered by his will were instituted in the Court of First Instance of Tayabas by whose order said justice of the peace delivered to administrator Escudero the properties of the deceased, such as furniture, jewelry, cattle (1 black horse, 1 black mare, 5 female carabaos), coconut lands. Garcia brought an action seeking to be declared as heirs; to have the properties under Escudero delivered to them; and to order Escudero to render an accounting of the properties in the latters custody. The trial court granted these reliefs, but Escudero only rendered an accounting and asked for stay of execution for the other judgments. In his statement of accounts, he explained that: 1. Certain personal properties were destroyed by fire (supported by evidence) 2. Cattle died due to rinder pest of 1898 3. Coconut lands were seized by revolutionists during a certain period. 4. He charged for sundries for travelling expenses. Garcia impugned the statement of accounts submitted by Escudero, and the trial court ordered Escudero to be responsible for such properties, i.e., that Escudero should pay for the items which were not properly (based on the trial courts opinion) accounted for. Issue: Whether or not the administrators (Escuderos) explanations were sufficient to absolve him from liabilities over the properties under his administration. Ruling: YES. The account rendered by defendant should be approved. As to the first item: It was not shown that such properties were destroyed by the negligence of Escudero. As to the second item: Although no written evidence of the death of such cattle was introduced in accordance with the laws then in force on large cattle, the fact of death of those animals was proven by the testimony of Escudero based on personal knowledge, and that such testimony was not timely objected to. As to the third item: There was evidence proving such seizure, and that it was also proved that there were no substantial produce after possession was reverted to Escudero. As to the fourth item: duly proven by evidence, not overthrown by contrary evidence.