INTO VS. VALLE G.R. No.

145379 Petitioner: Damiana Into Respondent: Mario Valle, Octavio Valle, Alberto Valle, Brenda Valle, Luisa vda. De Valle Ponente: J. Austria-Martinez FACTS: Victorio Valle, married to Luisa vda. De Valle, owned an estate consisting of six parcels of land. The two had six (6) children, one of which was Eleanor who is married to a certain Oscar Siapno. On the 19th of August 1990, Eleanor and her husband were ordered by Branch 14 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Davao City to pay Damiana Into the amount of P283,000.00 plus interests for a debt which was the subject of Civil Case No. 19-896-89. The courts decision was final and executory. On the 6th of August 1992, Sheriff Alberto C. Esguerra and Diosdado A. Cajes sold the six parcels of land by Victorio Valle, of which Eleanor was an heir and which was now held by Luisa vda. De Valle as administratrix following the death of her husband. As a result of the sale, respondents in this case filed a complaint with Branch 1 of the RTC of Tagum, Davao City seeking to nullify the sale of the property on the grounds that (1) Eleanor had already waived her rights as heir on the said property, a fact which the sheriff had verbally been made aware of this before the sale and (2) that Eleanor had no rights yet to the property sold. The case was transferred to Branch 2 where SP Proc. No. 63 was pending; the subject of the said special proceeding (SP) was the hereditary rights of the respondents to the estate of Victorio Valle. The case was dismissed by the RTC of Tagum. Respondents appealed to the CA which found merit in their case and thereby ordered the RTC to reinstate the respondents complaint, which was to declare the sale of the said property null and void, and to proceed with the trial of the same. Petitioner, asserting that the Court of Appeals (CA) had erred in its decision, filed this petition for review by certiorari. ISSUES: It was stated in the decision of the Court that the issues of the case were the following: 1) Whether or not the Waiver of Hereditary shares and/or Rights executed by Eleanor Valle Siapno is valid and that it was properly made; 2) Whether or not Eleanor Valle Siapnos interests in the assets of the Estate of her late father, Victorio Valle, as an heir is merely inchoate* and therefore may not be levied upon and sold; 3) Whether or not the granting of the appeal and ordering the RTC of Tagum by the Court of Appeals to reinstate the Respondents complaint and to proceed with the

trial of the same [is] tantamount to allowing the RTC, Branch 2 of Tagum (now Tagum City), Province of Davao del Norte, to interfere with the levy on attachment and levy on execution of the interests of Eleanor Valle Siapno in the assets of the estate of her late father of the Deputy Sheriff of the RTC Branch 14 of the City of Davao, which is a coordinate court. RULING: The Court did not place a decision on the first two issues as they did not have all the needed facts to make a verdict. The facts of the said issues may be determined only after a fullblown trial in the RTC. On the third issue, the CA did not err in reinstating the complaint and ordering the RTC to proceed with its trial because the respondents had a valid cause of action against the petitioner. A cause of action is an act or omission that violates the rights of others. (Sec. 2, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court) An action is an ordinary suit in a court of justice by which one party prosecutes another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prosecution or redress of a wrong. (De Guzman, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals) In this case, the respondents rights as heirs to the said property which was violated when the same was sold at a public auction, severing their legal claims to it. Since the property is still in the care of Luisa vda. De Valle, in her capacity as administratrix, since the property has not yet been settled and the heirs given their respective share, the said respondent also has a valid cause of action to implead in the RTC the property of her husband. The petition was DISMISSED.

*being only partly in existent or operation, potential to inherit the estate.