CAYETANO vs. HON. TOMAS T.
LEONIDAS ISSUES:
G.R. No. L-54919 May 30, 1984
FACTS:
 Adoracion C. Campos, in her lifetime, was a citizen of the United
States of America and a permanent resident of Philadelphia. She
executed a Last Will and Testament in the county of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, U.S.A., according to the laws thereat, and that while
in temporary sojourn in the Philippines, Adoracion C. Campos died
in the City of Manila, leaving property both in the Philippines and in
the United States of America.
 Adoracion C. Campos died, leaving Hermogenes Campos (father)
and her sisters, Nenita Paguia, Remedios Lopez, and Marieta
Medina as the surviving heirs. As the only compulsory heir is
Hermogenes, he executed an Affidavit of Adjudication, adjudicating
unto himself the entire estate of Adoracion.
 The Last Will and Testament of the late Adoracion C. Campos was
admitted and granted probate by the Orphan's Court Division of the
Court of Common Pleas, the probate court of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, County of Philadelphia, U.S.A., and letters of
administration were issued in favor of Clement J. McLaughlin all in
accordance with the laws of the said foreign country on procedure
and allowance of wills. Nenita C. Paguia, daughter or the testator,
was appointed Administratrix of the estate of said decedent.
 This was opposed by Adoracion’s father, Hermogenes Campos, who
earlier filed an Affidavit of Self-adjudication not being aware that
Adoracion had left a will. He later died and was substituted by Polly
Cayetano as petitioner in the instant case.
 A motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the rights of the
petitioner Hermogenes Campos merged upon his death with the
rights of the respondent and her sisters, only remaining children
and forced heirs was denied on September 12, 1983.
 Cayetano alleged that the trial court erred in ruling that the right of
a forced heir to his legitime can be divested by a decree admitting a
will to probate in which no provision is made for the forced heir in
complete disregard of Law of Succession.
1. Whether CFI Manila acquired jurisdiction? YES.
2. Whether or not a forced heir is entitled to his legitime in case the testator
was a citizen of another country? NO
3. Whether the will which completely deprived compulsory heir of share is
against public policy? NO
HELD:
1. YES, RULE 73 SECTION 1, the settlement of estate of Adoracion Campos
was correctly filed with the CFI of Manila where she had an estate since it
was alleged and proven that Adoracion at the time of her death was a
citizen and permanent resident of Pennsylvania, USA and not a usual
resident of Cavite.
Moreover, petitioner is now estopped from questioning the jurisdiction of
the probate court in the petition for relief. It is a settled rule that a party
cannot invoke the jurisdiction of a court to secure affirmative relief, against
his opponent and after failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question
that same jurisdiction.
2. Applying Article 16 par. (2) and 1039 of the Civil Code, the law which
governs Adoracion Campo's will is the law of Pennsylvania, U.S.A., which is
the national law of the decedent.
In this case, it was sufficiently established that Adoracion was an American
citizen and the law which governs her will is the law of Pennsylvania, USA,
which is the national law of the decedent. The U.S. law on succession in the
state of Pennsylvania applies to the intrinsic and extrinsic validity of the last
will and testament of a U.S. national and resident of Pennsylvania under
whose laws a person may give his entire estate to a complete stranger. It is
a settled rule that as regards the intrinsic validity of the provisions of the
will, as provided for by Article 16(2) and 1039 of the Civil Code, the
national law of the decedent must apply.
3. Bellis vs Bellis: It is therefore evident that whatever public policy or good
customs may be involved in our system of legitimes, Congress has not
intended to extend the same to the succession of foreign nationals.
WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari and prohibition is hereby dismissed
for lack of merit.