Crisolo vs. Macadaeg, G.R. No. L-7071, April 29, 1954

Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-7071 April 29, 1954

PEDRO CRISOLO, petitioner,
vs.
HON. HIGINO B. MACADAEG, ETC., ET AL., respondents.

Ramon J. Liceralde and Felicisimo U. Tiña for the respondents.

BENGZON, J.:

This is a petition for certiorari to annul the order of the respondent judge requiring Pedro Crisolo to pay a monthly pension pendente lite to a minor allegedly his daughter.

Petitioner asserts that, summoned to answer Marieta Villa' s complaint for support of Maria Erlinda Crisolo as his and her natural daughter, he denied such paternity in an answer properly filed; that upon request of complainant the respondent judge, acting in excess of jurisdiction, before the hearing of the case, and without affording petitioner a chance to object, issued an order directing him to pay Marieta Villa P50 monthly for support pendente lite and for medical expenses of said minor Maria Erlinda; and that his motion for reconsideration was denied.

Respondents reply that support pendente lite was ordered in the interest of justice, after the judge had been shown the birth certificate of the child and a medical certificate showing she had been suffering from Little's Disease and had been confined at the Children's Hospital (National Indigent) for about three years.

The petitioners invokes Francisco vs. Zandueta's holding¹ that were a minor through a guardian ad litem, brings an action for support on the ground that he is a son of the defendant, and the defendant denies his paternity, the court has no jurisdiction to award support pendente lite, because paternity having been denied and this civil status, from which the right to support is derived, being an issue, there is no authority to grant support pendente lite until a positive declaration has been made as to the existence of the relationship.

Without going into question whether the documents exhibited to the respondent judge established prima facie the disputed relationship in this case, and whether upon such proofs provisional maintenance could be decreed,² we deem it sufficient to observe that the complaint merely averred that Maria Erlinda Crisolo was the natural daughter of Pedro Crisolo. It did not aver that she was his recognized natural daughter. And yet under the Civil Code and the new Civil Code a natural daughter, as such, has no right to maintenance, unless she has been recognized.³

It is earnestly urged that un unrecognized natural child would thus be in worse condition than other illegitimate children, who are admittedly entitled to support. But such was the juridical situation under the Civil Code for sixty years. It was criticized on that score — it was defended too. The Congress in the new Civil Code (Art. 291) elected not to alter the situation. Ours is not the duty nor the power to amend the statute, which by the way, presents no interstitial space wherein to insert, in the words of Cardozo, "judge-made innovations."

It is alleged however that: (a) the complaint for support was precisely a petition to compel recognition of a natural child; (b) recognition was in order, the certificate of birth being prima facie evidence of paternity and (c) consequently support pendente lite was justified. These three propositions will separately be discussed and rebutted.

A. The complaint did not expressly ask for recognition. Neither did it impliedly ask for the recognition, because it related no facts either voluntary recognition by defendant under article 278, or of compulsory recognition under article 283 of the new Civil Code. It merely proceeded on the theory — erroneous indeed — that as Erlinda was defendant's natural daughter support should be furnished by him. Furthermore, acknowledgment could not have been properly asked, because the action had been initiated by Marietta Villa, the mother and not by the daughter⁴. Litigations for recognition are between parent and child (Arts. 283, 284, 285 new Civil Code) — not between one parent and the other, unless one litigates as guardian of the child.

And the circumstance that at the ex-parte hearing of the petition for support pendente lite some paper was exhibited — supposedly competent evidence of fatherhood — did not have the effect of altering the issues or competing theories as previously outlined by the respective pleadings. To hold the contrary view would sanction the employment of surreptitious maneuvers definitely out of place in judicial proceedings.

B. The certificate of birth, it is argued, which was exhibited to the judge, constituted prima facie evidence of filiation. We disagree.

It is a document, filed with the Local Civil Register of Iloilo, and signed by "Clarita Gustillo, informant" on March 4, 1948, stating that Maria Erlinda Crisolo had been born in Iloilo on February 5, 1945, the legitimate daughter of Marieta Villa and Pedro Crisolo. Under article 410 of the new Civil Code this would be prima facie proof that Erlinda was the legitimate daughter of the persons mentioned. But having alleged and admitted that Maria Erlinda was not a legitimate daughter, plaintiff completely destroyed the certificate's worth as evidence.

If it be contended that such certificate could, at least be proof that Maria Erlinda was the daughter of Pedro Crisolo, the maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus would at once come to mind poisoning the question whether it applies to documents as well as witnesses. At any rate there is another line of thought compelling outright rejection of such certificate as proof of bastard father-and-child relationship: Had it expressly so state — that. Maria Erlinda was the illegitimate daughter of the persons mentioned — the certificate would not have been recorded (and would not be prima facie evidence) because it was signed only by Clarita Gustillo, and not by the parents of the infant.

SEC. 5. Registration and certification of birth. — The declaration of the physician or midwife in attendance at the birth or, in default thereof, the declaration of either parent of the newborn child, shall be sufficient for the registration of a birth in the civil register. . . . In case of an illegitimate child, the birth certificate shall be signed and sworn to jointly by the parents of the infant or only by the mother if the father refuses. In the latter case, it shall not be permissible to state or reveal in the document the name of the father who refuses to acknowledge the child, or to give therein, any information by which such father could be identified. (Act No. 3753) (Emphasis ours.)

However, because the certificate described the child as legitimate it was accepted for registration upon the information of a third person, Clarita Gustillo. It is plain to see that to give the document probative value in court would be to approve evasion or circumvention of the above-indicated requirement, not to mention the violation of the specific prohibition against the revelation in the certificate of the name of the father without his consent.

Again pursuant to section 5, of the article 3753, the local civil register had no authority to make of record the paternity (illegitimate) of Pedro Crisolo upon the information of a third party. Wherefore his record could not be competent evidence of such paternity. Records of public officers which are admissible "are limited to those matters which the public officer has authority to record."⁵ And it is essential, to authorize admission of copy of the record of a private instrument "be made in accordance with the statutory requirements."⁶

Give this certificate evidential relevancy, and we thereby pave the way for any scheming unmarried mother to extort money for her child (and for herself) from any eligible bachelor or affluent pater familias. How? She simply causes the midwife to state in the birth certificate that the newborn babe is her legitimate offspring with that individual and the certificate will be accepted for registration, and it will be evidence for support pendente lite. And any lawyer with sufficient imagination will realize the exciting possibilities for mischief of such prima facie evidence — when and if the "father" dies in ignorance of the fraudulent design. The spirit of liberality towards illegitimate children need not be carried to that extent.

Divested of its official character, the document signed by Clarita Gustillo, the "certificate of birth", is undoubtedly incompetent evidence of fathership against Pedro Crisolo. As to him it is hearsay, it is res inter alios acta.

C. Supposing that the complaint amounted to a petition for recognition as natural child, and that the certificate of birth was prima facie evidence, the question remains whether support pendente lite may decreed. The argument might be advanced that as defendant is obliged to support only an acknowledged natural child, his obligation to support begins only from the moment he acknowledged i.e., only after he is compelled to acknowledge by decree of court at the petition of plaintiff. Nevertheless the angle need not be explored, because the two major premises on which it is constructed happen to be without foundation as above demonstrated.

Wherefore, in the absence of legal basis for Maria Erlinda's support, this petition will be granted,⁷ and the questioned order is hereby declared null and void. No costs.

Pablo, Montemayor, and Reyes, JJ., concur.
Jugo and Bautista Angelo, JJ., concur in the result.

Footnotes

¹ 61 Phil., 752.

² cf Sanchez vs. Zulueta, 68 Phil., 112; Mangoma vs. Macadaeg, 90 Phil., 508; Moran, Rules of Court (1952) Vol. II p. 118.

³ Concepcion vs. Untaran, 38 Phil., 736; Buenaventura vs. Urbano, 5 Phil., 1 Potot vs. Ycong, 40 Off. Gaz., July 26, 1941; Art. 291 (3) new Civil Code.

⁴ The complaint is entitled "Marieta Villa as the natural mother of Maria Erlinda Crisolo," plaintiff vs. Pedro Crisolo, defendant. And the prayer asks that defendant be ordered to give plaintiff support for Maria Erlinda.

⁵ See 20 Am. Jur., Sec. 1024.

⁶ See 20 Am. Jur., p. 880.

⁷ cf. Saavedra vs. Ibañez, 56 Phil., 33.

Jackson's family moves quickly to take charge

LOS ANGELES - Michael Jackson's family moved quickly Monday to take control of his complicated personal and financial affairs, winning temporary custody of his three children and asking a judge to name the King of Pop's mother as administrator of his estate.

In documents filed in Superior Court, Jackson's parents said they believe their 50-year-old son died without a valid will.

They also made it clear they believe they should take charge of both his debt-ridden but potentially lucrative financial empire and act as permanent caretakers of his three children.

Judge Mitchell Beckloff granted 79-year-old Katherine Jackson temporary guardianship of the children, who range in age from 7 to 12. He did not immediately rule on her requests to take charge of the children's and Jackson's estates.

Beckloff scheduled a hearing for July 6 and another for Aug. 3 to consider those issues and whether Katherine Jackson should be appointed the children's permanent guardian.

L. Londell McMillan, the family's attorney, said in a statement that the Jacksons are pleased with the results of their Monday filings.

"Mrs. Jackson deserves custody, and the family should have the administration of the brilliance of Mr. Michael Jackson. Mrs. Jackson is a wonderful, loving and strong woman with a special family many of us have admired for years. The personal and legal priorities are focused on first protecting the best interests of Mr. Michael Jackson's children, his family, his memorial services and then preserving his creative and business legacy with the dignity and honor it deserves."

When Jackson died Thursday, he left behind a 12-year-old son and 11-year-old daughter by his ex-wife Deborah Rowe, as well as a 7-year-old son born to a surrogate mother.

The Jackson family said the children — Michael Joseph Jackson Jr. (known as Prince Michael), Paris Michael Katherine Jackson and Prince Michael II — are living at the Jackson family compound in Los Angeles' San Fernando Valley.

"They have a long established relationship with paternal grandmother and are comfortable in her care," the family said in court documents.

Family patriarch Joe Jackson, 79, said at a news conference that the children were enjoying playing with other kids — something they do not normally do.

The documents state that although Rowe is the mother of the two older children, her whereabouts are unknown. The document simply listed "none" for the mother of the youngest child, Prince Michael II.

Supporting Katherine Jackson in her petition bid to administer the estate was Jackson's father, Joe Jackson.

The Jacksons say they have not heard from Rowe since their son's death. Rowe's attorney, Marta Almli, did not respond to an e-mail message seeking comment Monday. She previously said, "Ms. Rowe's only thoughts at this time have been regarding the devastating loss Michael's family has suffered."

Mark Lester, a former British child star who is godfather to Jackson's children, told The Associated Press he believes they belong with Jackson's mother.

"She is a very loving, kind and gracious woman, and she had a very close relationship with Michael and a very good rapport with her grandchildren," Lester said. "I know the kids are fine. They are deeply saddened by what's happened, but they're coping."

Meanwhile, authorities continued to investigate Jackson's death. Officials with the Los Angeles County coroner's office returned to the mansion he was renting at the time of his death and left with two large plastic bags of evidence.

Assistant Chief Coroner Ed Winter said the bags contained medication. He declined to elaborate.

Lawyers for Jackson's cardiologist Dr. Conrad Murray said the physician never prescribed the powerful drugs Demerol or Oxycontin for Jackson and did all he could to revive him when he found the entertainer near death.

Attorney Matt Alford told the AP it took as long as 30 minutes for paramedics to be called after Murray found Jackson with a faint pulse and performed CPR.

The delay was partly because Jackson's room in the rented mansion didn't have a telephone and Murray didn't know Jackson's street address to give to emergency crews, Alford said.

Eventually, Murray found a chef in the house and had him summon a security guard, who called for help while the doctor continued to perform CPR.

Jackson's father told reporters at the family compound that his son's funeral was still in the planning stages.

"It will be some private, but not closed all the way down to the public," he said without elaborating.

He added that his son would not be buried at Neverland Ranch, the sprawling playground he built in the rolling hills of Santa Barbara County then abandoned after going into seclusion following his acquittal on child molestation charges in 2005.

Jackson's father also used the news conference to plug a record company he said he's founding with a business partner.

"We have a lot of good artists pitching to come out," he said.

His son, who had not released a new recording or performed publicly in years, was believed to be hundreds of millions of dollars in debt at the time of his death. However, his finances are complicated and could take years to unravel.

Clearly one of his most valuable assets is his recording catalog, which his father could potentially rerelease through his new record company if the family gains control of his assets. There could also be recordings in Jackson's estate that he had never released.

The AP learned that Jackson had finished an elaborate video production project just two weeks before he died. The five-week project dubbed "Dome Project" could be the final finished video piece overseen by the star.

There's also a financial bonanza to be had in the Sony/ATV Music Publishing catalog of which Jackson owned 50 percent. The 750,000-song catalog includes music by the Beatles, Bob Dylan, Neil Diamond, Lady Gaga and the Jonas Brothers, and is estimated to be worth as much as $2 billion.

"Quite frankly, he may be worth more dead than alive," Jerry Reisman, general counsel for the Hit Factory, a recording studio where Jackson produced his best-selling album "Thriller," said recently.

Jackson nearly lost his beloved Neverland, which was once filled with amusement park ridesThomas Barrack
and wild animals, to foreclosure in March. Billionaire real estate investor bailed him out at the 11th hour, setting up a joint venture with Jackson that took ownership of the 2,500-acre property.

The ranch's future is uncertain, but three of Jackson's brothers visited the estate with Barrack over the weekend. A spokesman for the holding company that now operates it said it was premature to talk about the ranch's future.

What is a Mortgage?

A mortgage loan is a loan secured by real property through the use of a note which evidences the existence of the loan and the encumbrance of that realty through the granting of a mortgage which secures the loan. However, the word mortgage alone, in everyday usage, is most often used to mean mortgage loan.

A home buyer or builder can obtain financing (a loan) either to purchase or secure against the property from a financial institution, such as a bank, either directly or indirectly through intermediaries. Features of mortgage loans such as the size of the loan, maturity of the loan, interest rate, method of paying off the loan, and other characteristics can vary considerably.

Basic concepts and legal regulation

According to Anglo-American property law, a mortgage occurs when an owner (usually of a fee simple interest in realty) pledges his interest as security or collateral for a loan. Therefore, a mortgage is an encumbrance on property just as an easement would be, but because most mortgages occur as a condition for new loan money, the word mortgage has become the generic term for a loan secured by such real property.

As with other types of loans, mortgages have an interest rate and are scheduled to amortize over a set period of time; typically 30 years. All types of real property can, and usually are, secured with a mortgage and bear an interest rate that is supposed to reflect the lender's risk.

Mortgage lending is the primary mechanism used in many countries to finance private ownership of residential property. For commercial mortgages see the separate article. Although the terminology and precise forms will differ from country to country, the basic components tend to be similar:

• Property: the physical residence being financed. The exact form of ownership will vary from country to country, and may restrict the types of lending that are possible.
• Mortgage: the security created on the property by the lender, which will usually include certain restrictions on the use or disposal of the property (such as paying any outstanding debt before selling the property).
• Borrower: the person borrowing who either has or is creating an ownership interest in the property.
• Lender: any lender, but usually a bank or other financial institution.
• Principal: the original size of the loan, which may or may not include certain other costs; as any principal is repaid, the principal will go down in size.
• Interest: a financial charge for use of the lender's money.
• Foreclosure or repossession: the possibility that the lender has to foreclose, repossess or seize the property under certain circumstances is essential to a mortgage loan; without this aspect, the loan is arguably no different from any other type of loan.

Many other specific characteristics are common to many markets, but the above are the essential features. Governments usually regulate many aspects of mortgage lending, either directly (through legal requirements, for example) or indirectly (through regulation of the participants or the financial markets, such as the banking industry), and often through state intervention (direct lending by the government, by state-owned banks, or sponsorship of various entities). Other aspects that define a specific mortgage market may be regional, historical, or driven by specific characteristics of the legal or financial system.

Mortgage loans are generally structured as long-term loans, the periodic payments for which are similar to an annuity and calculated according to the time value of money formulae. The most basic arrangement would require a fixed monthly payment over a period of ten to thirty years, depending on local conditions. Over this period the principal component of the loan (the original loan) would be slowly paid down through amortization. In practice, many variants are possible and common worldwide and within each country.

Lenders provide funds against property to earn interest income, and generally borrow these funds themselves (for example, by taking deposits or issuing bonds). The price at which the lenders borrow money therefore affects the cost of borrowing. Lenders may also, in many countries, sell the mortgage loan to other parties who are interested in receiving the stream of cash payments from the borrower, often in the form of a security (by means of a securitization).

Mortgage lending will also take into account the (perceived) riskiness of the mortgage loan, that is, the likelihood that the funds will be repaid (usually considered a function of the creditworthiness of the borrower); that if they are not repaid, the lender will be able to foreclose and recoup some or all of its original capital; and the financial, interest rate risk and time delays that may be involved in certain circumstances.

Mortgage loan types

There are many types of mortgages used worldwide, but several factors broadly define the characteristics of the mortgage. All of these may be subject to local regulation and legal requirements.

• Interest: interest may be fixed for the life of the loan or variable, and change at certain pre-defined periods; the interest rate can also, of course, be higher or lower.
• Term: mortgage loans generally have a maximum term, that is, the number of years after which an amortizing loan will be repaid. Some mortgage loans may have no amortization, or require full repayment of any remaining balance at a certain date, or even negative amortization.
• Payment amount and frequency: the amount paid per period and the frequency of payments; in some cases, the amount paid per period may change or the borrower may have the option to increase or decrease the amount paid.
• Prepayment: some types of mortgages may limit or restrict prepayment of all or a portion of the loan, or require payment of a penalty to the lender for prepayment.

Adjustable rates transfer part of the interest rate risk from the lender to the borrower, and thus are widely used where fixed rate funding is difficult to obtain or prohibitively expensive. Since the risk is transferred to the borrower, the initial interest rate may be from 0.5% to 2% lower than the average 30-year fixed rate; the size of the price differential will be related to debt market conditions, including the yield curve.

Additionally, lenders in many markets rely on credit reports and credit scores derived from them. The higher the score, the more creditworthy the borrower is assumed to be. Favorable interest rates are offered to buyers with high scores. Lower scores indicate higher risk for the lender, and higher rates will generally be charged to reflect the (expected) higher default rates.

A partial amortization or balloon loan is one where the amount of monthly payments due are calculated (amortized) over a certain term, but the outstanding principal balance is due at some point short of that term. This payment is sometimes referred to as a "balloon payment" or bullet payment. The interest rate for a balloon loan can be either fixed or floating. The most common way of describing a balloon loan uses the terminology X due in Y, where X is the number of years over which the loan is amortized, and Y is the year in which the principal balance is due.

Loan to value and downpayments

Upon making a mortgage loan for purchase of a property, lenders usually require that the borrower make a downpayment, that is, contribute a portion of the cost of the property. This downpayment may be expressed as a portion of the value of the property (see below for a definition of this term). The loan to value ratio (or LTV) is the size of the loan against the value of the property. Therefore, a mortgage loan where the purchaser has made a downpayment of 20% has a loan to value ratio of 80%. For loans made against properties that the borrower already owns, the loan to value ratio will be imputed against the estimated value of the property.

The loan to value ratio is considered an important indicator of the riskiness of a mortgage loan: the higher the LTV, the higher the risk that the value of the property (in case of foreclosure) will be insufficient to cover the remaining principal of the loan.

Value: appraised, estimated, and actual

Since the value of the property is an important factor in understanding the risk of the loan, determining the value is a key factor in mortgage lending. The value may be determined in various ways, but the most common are:

1. Actual or transaction value: this is usually taken to be the purchase price of the property. If the property is not being purchased at the time of borrowing, this information may not be available.
2. Appraised or surveyed value: in most jurisdictions, some form of appraisal of the value by a licensed professional is common. There is often a requirement for the lender to obtain an official appraisal.
3. Estimated value: lenders or other parties may use their own internal estimates, particularly in jurisdictions where no official appraisal procedure exists, but also in some other circumstances.

Standard or conforming mortgages

Many countries have a notion of standard or conforming mortgages that define a perceived acceptable level of risk, which may be formal or informal, and may be reinforced by laws, government intervention, or market practice. For example, a standard mortgage may be considered to be one with no more than 70-80% LTV and no more than one-third of gross income going to mortgage debt.

A standard or conforming mortgage is a key concept as it often defines whether or not the mortgage can be easily sold or securitized, or, if non-standard, may affect the price at which it may be sold. In the United States, a conforming mortgage is one which meets the established rules and procedures of the two major government-sponsored entities in the housing finance market (including some legal requirements). In contrast, lenders who decide to make nonconforming loans are exercising a higher risk tolerance and do so knowing that they face more challenge in reselling the loan. Many countries have similar concepts or agencies that define what are "standard" mortgages. Regulated lenders (such as banks) may be subject to limits or higher risk weightings for non-standard mortgages.

Repaying the capital

There are various ways to repay a mortgage loan; repayment depends on locality, tax laws and prevailing culture.

Predatory mortgage lending

There is concern in the U.S. that consumers are often victims of predatory mortgage lending[2]. The main concern is that mortgage brokers and lenders, operating legally, are finding loopholes in the law to obtain additional profit. The typical scenario is that terms of the loan are beyond the means of the borrower. The borrower makes a number of interest and principal payments, and then defaults. The lender then takes the property and recovers the amount of the loan, and also keeps the interest and principal payments, as well as loan origination fees.