Republic of the Philippines (a) Declaring oppositor Ma. Theresa R.

Alberto as
SUPREME COURT having acquired the status of a natural child of the
Manila late Gov. Juan M. Alberto;

THIRD DIVISION (b) Ordering the administratrix and widow of the

deceased and their children, namely, Mary Joy, Maria
Rebecca, Juan, Jr., Juan III, Maria Yolanda and Juan
G.R. No. 86639 June 2, 1994
IV, all surnamed Alberto, to recognize and
acknowledge oppositor as an acknowledged natural
MA. THERESA R. ALBERTO, petitioner,  child of the late Gov. Alberto;
vs.
COURT OF APPEALS, INTESTATE ESTATE OF JUAN M. ALBERTO, and
(c) Declaring oppositor as one of the heirs of the late
YOLANDA R. ALBERTO, respondents.
Gov. Juan M. Alberto;

Martiniano P. Vivo for petitioner.

(d) Ordering the administratrix to partition the
deceased’s estate and turn over to oppositor her
M.M. Lazaro & Associates for respondents. participation therein equivalent to one-half (1/2) of
the share of each legitimate child; and
ROMERO, J.:
(e) Ordering the administratrix to pay oppositor the
sum of P10,000.00 as attorney’s fees and expenses
When a putative father manifests openly through words and deeds his
of litigation.
recognition of a child, the courts can do no less than confirm said
acknowledgment. As the immortal bard Shakespeare perspicaciously
said: "Let your own discretion be your tutor; suit the action to the word, Costs against the administratrix.
the word to the action." Herein deceased father cannot possibly be
charged with indecisiveness or vacillation for he suited his action to his
SO ORDERED. 1
word and his word to his action.

The probate court’s findings are quoted hereunder, to wit:

In the instant case, we have, therefore, affirmed the decision of the
probate court declaring petitioner as having acquired the status of a
natural child of the deceased Juan M. Alberto and, as such, entitled to 1) In the case at bar, the Court believes, and so holds,
participate in the latter's estate. that the oppositor has been in continuous
possession of the status of a child of Juan Alberto by
his direct acts as well as the acts of his family, as
On September 18, 1953, a child named Ma. Theresa Alberto was born out
follows:
of wedlock to one Aurora Reniva with Juan M. Alberto as the alleged
father. Accordingly, she used "Alberto" as her surname in all her school
records and correspondences. (a) The deceased gave the oppositor sums of money
for her schooling;
On September 18, 1967, Juan M. Alberto, felled by a bullet from an
assassin’s gun, died intestate.  (b) The deceased made known to his friends and
relatives that she was his daughter; and
His widow, Yolanda R. Alberto, filed a petition for the administration of
his estate on January 10, 1968. After the publication of notices, she was (c) He made known to the personnel of the
appointed as the administratrix of the estate. After the Inventory and International School where oppositor was enrolled
Appraisal and the Administratrix' Accounting were approved on August 1, that she was his daughter.
1970 and on April 29, 1971 respectively, the proceedings were ordered
closed and terminated.
2) The following incidents would show the direct
acts of the family of the deceased.
On September 15, 1978, Ma. Theresa Alberto filed a motion for leave to
intervene as oppositor and to re-open the proceedings praying that she
(a) When the deceased’s younger sister, Mrs. Aurita
be declared to have acquired the status of a natural child and as such,
Alberto Solidum asked that the oppositor be sent to
entitled to share in the estate of the deceased. The motion was granted by
her house in her Sunday best to meet her father for
the probate court.
the first time;

Upon the presentation by the parties of their respective evidence during

(b) When Fr. Arcilla brought the oppositor to the
the trial, the probate court was convinced that indeed, Ma. Theresa
bedside of the deceased in the hospital and Fr.
Alberto had been in continuous possession of the status of a natural child.
Arcilla asked the guard to give way to her as she was
Thereupon, it rendered a decision compelling the decedent’s heirs and
a member of the family;
estate to recognize her as a natural daughter and to allow her to
participate in the estate proceedings. The dispositive portion of the
decision reads as follows: (c) When the step-mother of the deceased, during
the wake, introduced the oppositor to her youngest
sister as an elder sister.
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered in favor
of oppositor and against the estate of the deceased
Juan M. Alberto —
3) Prescinding from the foregoing, there is sufficient introduced her to others as the eldest daughter of
evidence to prove that the oppositor is the child of Juan Alberto.
the deceased.
(j) The children of the brothers and sisters of Juan
1. Oppositor’s mother, Aurora Reniva, testified: Alberto recognized her as their cousin.

(a) of an indiscretion that led to the conception of 3) Jose Tablizo testified that:
and giving birth to the oppositor;
(a) There was a strong physical resemblance
(b) that Mrs. Aurita Solidum arranged the meeting between the deceased and the oppositor.
between the oppositor and the deceased at the
MOPC; (This particular testimony was corroborated
(b) The deceased and the oppositor wrote similarly.
by Cristeta Andaya, former maid of Mrs. Solidum,
and by the oppositor) and
(c) It was known among the friends of the deceased,
particularly the Breeze Gang, composed of the
(c) that Juan Alberto had been sending her money
witness, Jose Tablizo, the deceased and 4 others.
from time to time.

(d) Sometime in 1967, the deceased showed him the

2) Oppositor also testified that:
report card of the Oppositor and boasted of her high
grades.
(a) She had her first meeting with her father at the
MOPC where he gave her P500.00 personally and
(e) The friends of the deceased had a party in Virac,
two telephone numbers where he could be
Catanduanes for the oppositor whom they
contacted and where they talked about her name,
considered as the deceased’s daughter. (This was
age and other matters.
corroborated by Silverio Taberara.)

(b) She had other meetings with her father at the

4) Atty. Martiniano Vivo testified that Commissioner
MOPC on which occasions her father also gave her
of Immigration Edmundo Reyes, as lawyer for the
money.
deceased, made an appointment with him (Atty.
Vivo) for a conference, at which they discussed the
(c) The deceased visited her two times at the latter’s letter to the deceased regarding the
International School whose rules on visitors were oppositor. In said conference, Com. Reyes said that
strict and when her father visited her, the secretary the deceased was not denying that he was the father
of the principal told her that her father was waiting of the oppositor. And because of his marital status
for her. This showed that the deceased had and the fact that he was a public official, he wanted
identified himself to the personnel of the school that to avoid public scandal with the promise to support
he was the father of the oppositor. the oppositor quietly through a cousin, Fr. Arcilla. 2

(d) He promised to see her in her school during her The Court of Appeals reversed the above decision of the probate court on
birthday on September 18, 1968 but was not able to the strength of the following observations:
do so because of his untimely death.
Assuming the foregoing to be true, we do not believe
(e) The deceased promised to bring the oppositor to they satisfy the degree of proof to establish that
Catanduanes but failed likewise because of his oppositor was in continuous possession of the status
death. of a natural child of the deceased.

(f) When oppositor and her mother went to the PGH In one case, the following facts were proved;
on the occasion of her father’s death, Fr. Arcilla held that two nurses took care of the children at the
her by the hand and asked the guard to make way expense of the defendant; that said defendant
for her because she was a child of Juan Alberto. kissed the children, called them sons, and
ordered that they be taken care of very well;
that he gave the money for the necessities of
(g) After the wake for her deceased father, the
the mother and the six children, the oldest of
deceased’s step-mother, Saturnina Alberto,
whom called the father; that he visited the
introduced her as a sister to Joy Alberto her half-
mother, complained of his big family, and was
sister.
publicly regarded as the father of the children.
It was held that these were not sufficient to be
(h) Congressman Jose Alberto allowed her a basis for a declaration of paternity. They may
associates, upon her representations, to use the show that the defendant was convinced of his
ballroom of the Regent of Manila for practice paternity in relation to the children; but they
purposes. Congressman Alberto was the owner of do not show any intent on his part to place
the Regent of Manila. such children in the possession of status of
natural children. The continued possession of
such 
(i) Her uncles and aunts, i.e., brothers and sisters of
status cannot be founded on conjectures and
her father, regarded her as their niece and
presumption. So, also, the mere fact that
defendant’s mother used to visit the child,
 cannot be considered as conduct of his family talked about petitioner, the deceased gave petitioner P500.00 and two
sufficient to confer  telephone numbers;
the uninterrupted possession of the status of a
natural child. 
6) that Juan M. Alberto would have visited petitioner on her birthday in
(1 Tolentino, Civil Code of the Philippines,
her school, International School, if not for his untimely death on
1983 ed., pp. 604-605, citing, Sentencia, 12
September 18, 1967;
October 1907; Gustilo vs. Gustilo, et al., 14
SCRA 149; Sentencia, 9 May 1921; Potot vs.
Ycong, No. 6651, 22 March 1941, 40 O.G. No. 4, 7) that when petitioner and her mother went to the PGH on the occasion
26 July 1941, p. 748) of Juan M. Alberto’s death, Fr. Arcilla held her by the hand and asked the
guard to make way for her as she was a daughter of Juan M. Alberto;
We find the evidence of oppositor-appellee even
weaker than that proven in the aforequoted citation. 8) that after the wake for deceased Juan M. Alberto, his step mother,
As a matter of fact, oppositor's Exhibit W-1, a letter Saturnina Alberto introduced petitioner to Joy Alberto as the latter’s
written by oppositor to Jose Tablizo after the death sister;
of the deceased, betrays a lack of association
between the deceased and oppositor such as
9) that the siblings of Juan M. Alberto regarded petitioner as their niece
normally characterizes the relationship between
and introduced her to their children as the eldest daughter of Juan M.
father and child. It gives the impression that the
Alberto;
deceased studiously distanced himself from the
oppositor and had no intention whatsoever of
recognizing oppositor as his child. The pertinent 10) that the children of Juan M. Alberto’s siblings regarded her as their
portion of the letter reads: cousin;

I have always been proud to be JMA’s eldest 11) that petitioner was known by Juan M. Alberto’s friends as his
daughter, and I feel even prouder after I heard daughter;
from people like you. You were the ones that
knew him most, shared his dreams as a young
12) that Juan M. Alberto showed Jose Tablizo the grades of petitioner and
man, and witnessed his struggle from
remarked that those were the grades of his daughter.
Palmera’s slums to Forbes Park. You saw him
rise from cargador to lawyer and, finally, to
governor; I only heard about them through Private respondent, Yolanda Alberto, the sole witness for private
Mama. His life was a novel, and if I were to respondents, denied that Juan M. Alberto ever recognized Ma. Theresa
help write it, I would be able to contribute but Alberto as his daughter. She presented in evidence Aurora Reniva’s
a few pages, for I knew him only as a Big Man. letters to Juan M. Alberto dated December 23, 1955, September 27, 1954
It is YOU who had a part in the first adventures and March 15, 1960; Aurora Reniva’s letter to Fr. Arcilla dated December
of that same novel, and I envy you. (p. 35, 23, 1955; letter of Zenaida Reniva to Juan M. Alberto dated September 16,
Folder of Exhibits) 3 1953, to prove that Juan M. Alberto refused to recognize Ma. Theresa
Alberto as his own. 4
Hence this petition.
However, these letters do not prove that Juan M. Alberto refused to
recognize Ma. Theresa Alberto. All that the letters stated was that Aurora
May the estate and heirs of deceased Juan M. Alberto be ordered to
Reniva was having a difficult time raising a child by her own self and
recognize petitioner as the deceased’s natural daughter on the basis of
therefore, she was seeking the assistance of Juan M. Alberto. Private
the evidence presented by petitioner to establish her claim that she has
respondent quoted as Exhibit "3-B" the portion of Aurora Reniva’s letter
been in continuous possession of the status of a natural child?
dated March 15, 1960 which says:

We rule in the affirmative.

. . . I am just wondering why after all those years of
patient waiting, you still do not give a damn to her. 5
In the probate court, the following have been established:
The full text of the paragraph, however, reads as follows:
1) that prior to Juan M. Alberto's marriage to Yolanda Reyes, herein
private respondent, Juan M. Alberto and Aurora Reniva, mother of herein
On the 23rd of this month, Maria Theresa P. Alberto
petitioner, were sweethearts;
will graduate from the Prep School of Holy Ghost
College. I am just wondering why after all those
2) that as a consequence of an indiscretion, Aurora Reniva conceived and years of patient waiting, you still do not give a damn
gave birth to herein petitioner Ma. Theresa Alberto on September 18, to her. I thought, as I was told before by Fr. Arcilla,
1953; that I just pray and wait because he said pretty soon
you will be sending her money for support. So far,
only the 300 pesos was received by us last October,
3) that petitioner used 'Alberto' as her surname in all her school records
1959. For it, I am very grateful because it helped me
and Juan M. Alberto was known to be her father;
a lot in our wants. 6

4) that through Fr. Arcilla, a first cousin of Juan M. Alberto, money was
The letter itself shows that Juan M. Alberto was not completely indifferent
given to Aurora Reniva;
towards Ma. Theresa Alberto. He did provide her support whenever he
could.
5) that when petitioner was about nine (9) years old, Mrs. Aurita Solidum,
the youngest sister of Juan M. Alberto, arranged the first meeting between
petitioner and Juan M. Alberto at the MOPC and during said meeting, they
The latest letter that was presented in evidence was dated March 15, people like you. You were the ones that knew him
1960. At the time, petitioner and Juan M. Alberto had not yet met. About most, shared his dreams as a young man, and
two years later, when petitioner was nine years old, Mrs. Aurita Solidum witnessed his struggle from, palmera’s slums to
arranged the first meeting between petitioner and the deceased. This Forbes Park. You saw him rise from cargador to
initial meeting was followed by many more. Moreover, it is noteworthy lawyer and, finally, to governor; I only heard about
that Juan M. Alberto never took any step to stop petitioner from using his them through Mama. His life was a novel, and if I
surname. The testimony of Jose Tablizo established his recognition of Ma. were to help write it, I would be able to contribute
Theresa Alberto as his daughter. He testified that Juan M. Alberto showed but a few pages, for I knew him only as a Big Man. It
him two report cards of Ma. Theresa which showed straight "A's." He said is YOU who had a part in the first adventures of that
"Boy! Great!" and Juan M. Alberto said that those were the grades of his same novel, and I envy you. 8
daughter. 7 This testimony is now being discredited for being hearsay.
This Court holds that the same falls within the exceptions to the hearsay
What a poignant novel this daughter could well author as she now seeks
rule. Sec. 38, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court provides as follows:
to establish indubitable parental links with a father who sired her some
forty-one years ago. Why he desisted from marrying the mother of this
Sec. 38. Declaration Against Interest. — The girl at a time when no impediment blocked the way is a matter one can
declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to merely conjecture at.
testify, against the interest of the declarant, if the
fact asserted at the declaration was at the time it
While he did contract marriage subsequently with another woman, it was
was made so far contrary to declarant's own interest
only too clear that he had no intentions of closing definitively that chapter
that a reasonable man in his position would not have
in his life when he begat his first-born. Of the different categories of
made his declaration unless he believed it to be true,
illegitimate children under the old Civil Code, the natural child occupies
may be received in evidence against himself or his
the highest position, she being the child of parents who, at the time of her
successors in interest and against third persons.
conception, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry each other
and could, therefore, have contracted a valid marriage. Often the fruit of
As found by the trial court, recognition of petitioner's status as a natural first love, she is ensconced firmly in her parent's hearts. No subsequent
daughter of Juan M. Alberto was made, not only by the latter, but by his liaisons, though blessed with legitimate offspring, can completely
relatives as well — Fr. Cipriano Arcilla, Jose Alberto, Aurita Solidum and obliterate those early memories.
Saturnina Alberto, among others. Private respondent only had to present
any one of those relatives to negate petitioner's testimony that she had
A shared past intimacy between the putative parents and the clear marks
been acknowledged by them as the eldest daughter of the deceased. Her
of heredity stamped on the brow of their offspring are not to be denied.
failure to do so baffles this Court. If indeed Ma. Theresa Alberto were
Thus, whether openly or furtively, a father in the situation of Juan M.
fabricating her testimony, the family of the deceased would have been
Alberto could not have resisted manifesting signs of concern and care
more than willing to destroy the claims of an intruder. Under the
insofar as his firstborn is concerned. If, at an early age, the child shows
circumstances, it is safe for us to assume that had any of the relatives
much talent and great promise as petitioner in this case apparently did, it
mentioned by petitioner been presented as witness for private
is understandable, and even to be expected, that the father would proudly
respondent, their testimonies would be detrimental to the latter's cause.
step forward to claim paternity — either through his direct acts or those
of his family, or both, as in instant case.
In view of the foregoing, we hold that petitioner has been in continuous
possession of the status of a natural child of the deceased in accordance
In the case at bench, evidence is not wanting from which it may logically
with Article 283 of the Civil Code which provides, inter alia:
be concluded that the deceased Juan M. Alberto took no pains to conceal
his paternity. No less than his younger sister, his stepmother, his priest-
Art. 283. In any of the following cases, the father is cousin, several relatives and close friends were categorically informed of
obliged to recognize the child as his natural child: the relationship and they accepted the same as fact.

xxx xxx xxx Understandably, considering the strait-laced mores of the times and the
social and political stature of Juan M. Alberto and his family, those who
were privy to the relationship observed discreetness. But he himself
(2) when the child is in continuous possession of
openly visited his daughter in school, had meetings with her at the MOPC
status of a child of the alleged father by the direct
on which occasions he gave her money and introduced her proudly to his
acts of the latter or his family.
gangmates.

The Court of Appeals, in reversing the decision of the probate court,

Where the daughter admits to envy in a letter to her father’s friend
stated as follows:
because the latter played a greater role in her father’s life, this is but the
natural expression of a wistful longing of a child to reach out to her
We find the evidence of oppositor-appellee even biological father. Far be it for us to interpret such sentiment as a betrayal
weaker than that proven in the aforequoted citation. of "a lack of association between the deceased and oppositor such as
As a matter of fact, oppositor's Exhibit W-1, a letter normally characterizes the relationship between father and child." In this
written by oppositor to Jose Tablizo after the death instance, the lack of association cannot be helped for the relationship was
of the deceased, betrays a lack of association far from normal.
between the deceased and oppositor such as
normally characterizes the relationship between
Much less do we take it as giving the impression that the deceased
father and child. It gives the impression that the
"studiously distanced himself from the oppositor and had no intention
deceased studiously distanced himself from the
whatsoever of recognizing oppositor as his child." On the contrary, during
oppositor and had not intention whatsoever of
his lifetime, Juan M. Alberto acted in such a manner as to evince his intent
recognizing oppositor as his child. The pertinent
to recognize Ma. Theresa Alberto, herein oppositor, as his flesh and blood,
portion of the letter reads:
first, by allowing her from birth to use his family name; second, by giving
her and her mother sums of money by way of support and lastly, by
I have always been proud to be JMA’s eldest openly introducing her to members of his family, relatives and friends as
daughter, and I feel even prouder after I heard from his daughter. Supplementing such unmistakable acts of recognition were
those of his kin and gangmates manifesting open acceptance of such
relationship. Taken altogether, the claimed filiation would be hard to
disprove.

Since the oppositor seeks a judicial declaration that she be recognized as

a natural child to enable her to participate in the estate of the deceased,
Article 285 of the Civil Code prescribing the period when such action
should be brought governs. It provides:

Art. 285. The action for the recognition of natural

children may be brought only during the lifetime of
the presumed parents, except in the following cases:

(1) If the father or mother died during the minority

of the child, in which case the latter may file the
action before the expiration of four years from the
attainment of his majority.

x x x           x x x          x x x

The oppositor's case falls clearly under the above exception.

Juan M. Alberto died during the minority of petitioner, that is, on

September 18, 1967 — the day petitioner turned fourteen. As such,
petitioner had four years from the time she reached twenty-one on
September 18, 1974, which was then the age of majority, within which to
bring the aforesaid action. Thus, petitioner had until September 18, 1978
within which to file the action for recognition. Petitioner filed her motion
for leave to intervene as oppositor and to re-open the proceedings with
the prayer that she be declared to have acquired the status of a natural
child and as such, entitled to share in the estate of the deceased, on
September 15, 1978. Said motion was, therefore, seasonably filed three
days before the expiration of the four-year period.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this petition is hereby GRANTED,

the decision of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED and that of the probate
court AFFIRMED.

SO ORDERED.

Feliciano, Bidin, Melo and Vitug, JJ., concur.