Gaspay v.

CA (Dom)
Topic: Prescription of action to impugn legitimacy
Facts :
 Flaviano Gaspay died intestate on October 14, 1983. H was then
married to Agueda Denoso. They were childless.
 On July 6, 1988 private respondent Guadalupe Gaspay Alfaro files a
petition at trial court that she is the acknowledged illegitimate child of
Flaviano with Claudia Pason with whom decedent allegedly had an
illicit relationship. Private respondent prayed for issuance of letters
of administrator of Flaviano‘s estate.
Also when Guadalupe filed said action, she still used Gaspay affixed to her
legal surname as married to Alfaro, thereby shouting to the world her consent
to the acknowledgment of an illegitimate child.
As to the action being instituted after death of putative father, CA said action
based on acknowledgement may be brought even after death of putative
father. As provided in Section 6 of Rule 78:
Sec. 6. When and to whom letters of administration granted. — If no executor
is named in the will, or the executor or executors are incompetent, refused the
trust, or fail to give bond, or a person dies intestate, administration
shall be granted:

 Petitioners Flaviano S. Gaspay Jr., adopted son of the decedent and

Eriberta, next of kin (petitioners) filed for an motion to dismiss saying
that Guadalupe is a stranger.
 Trial court denied the motion to dismiss saying that such was based
on indubitable grounds but trial court nonetheless dismissed petition
of private respondent saying that testimonial and documentary
evidence failed to prove status of Guadalupe and failed to show
Guadalupe is consenting to the acknowledgement as an illegitimate
child and that such action should have been filed in the lifetime of
Flaviano.
xxx xxx xxx
(b) If such surviving husband or wife, as the case may be, or next of kin, or
the person selected by them, be incompetent or unwilling, or if the husband or
widow, or next kin, neglects for thirty (30) days after the death of the person
to apply for administration or to request that administration be granted to some
other person, it may be granted to one or more of the principal creditors, if
competent and willing to serve;
(c) If there is no such creditor competent and willing to serve, it may be granted
to such other person as the court may select."

 Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the trial court saying that:
She thereby proved entitlement to the administration of estate. Moreover, the
1. Evidence is ample to prove filiation as illegitimate child
petitioners neglected to apply for a letter admin 30 days after the death of
2. Evid is sufficient to show that Guadalupe consented to the
Flaviano Gaspay.
acknowledgement as IC
3. Action can be instituted after death of putative father

Issue : Whether Guadalupe is an illegitimate child.

Ruling : Yes. The trial court did not discount the testimony of Martin Garin
(agent to logging concessionaire of Flaviano for 18 years) who verified
handwriting and signature of Flaviano in a letter addressed to Guadalupe and
Toming (husband of Guadalupe) regarding the hospitalization expenses of
Guadalupe’s daughter.
CA said that the trial court must have assumed that Flaviano‘s handwriting
must have metamorphosed during the years but it could be possible that
handwriting of Flaviano never changed at all.