SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

G.R. No. L-8218        December 15, 1955
EULOGIA BIGORNIA DE CARDENAS vs. LEONCIO CARDENAS, ET AL. -->

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-8218        December 15, 1955

EULOGIA BIGORNIA DE CARDENAS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. LEONCIO CARDENAS and FLORENCIA RIÑEN, Defendants-Appellants.

Sixto Brillantes for appellants.
Sayo, Sobrepena & Bringas for appellee.

PADILLA, J.:

This is an action to annul the marriage entered into by and between Leoncio Cardenas and Florencia Rinen upon the ground that when said marriage was entered into on April 1948, the plaintiff to whom he had been married on 10 July 1927 was still alive.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

In their answer the defendants plead that they have no knowledge or information as to the marriage performed by Minister George W. Wright on 10 July 1927 uniting Leoncio Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia as husband and wife, nor as to the authority of the minister to solemnize the marriage; tha Leoncio Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia lived together for sometime, he believing that he and she had a common home; that the defendant Florencia Rinen married Leoncio Cardenas in the honest belief and conviction that both parties were capable of entering into a valid marriage. Upon these allegations they pray that the complaint be dismissed with costs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

On the date set for the hearing of the case the parties submitted the following stipulation of facts:

Come now the plaintiff and the defendants, duly assisted by their respective attorneys, in the above-entitled case and to this Honorable Court respectfully submit the following - chanrobles virtual law library

STIPULATION OF FACTSchanrobles virtual law library

1. That plaintiff and defendant Leoncio Cardenas were married at Malate, Manila on July 10, 1927, before Minister George W. Wright, as evidenced by the original marriage contract marked as Exhibit A for the plaintiff.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

2. That defendants Leoncio Cardenas and Florencia Rinen were married at Badoc, Ilocos Norte, on April 10, 1948, before Justice of the Peace Vicente R. Campos, as evidenced by a certification issued by the Municipal Treasurer of said municipality and dated July 27, 1951, marked as Exhibit B for the plaintiff;chanrobles virtual law library

3. That defendant Leoncio Cardenas admitted in his sworn affidavit dated August 17, 1945, and marked as Exhibit C for the plaintiff that he was legally married to Eulogia Bigornia on July 10, 1927, at Malate, Manila, before Rev. George W. Wright, minister;chanrobles virtual law library

4. That the U.S. Veterans Administration found from the records on file in said office that Eulogia Bigornia de Cardenas is the legal wife of Leoncio Cardenas, as evidenced by the letter of Orvile A. Bobcock, Chief, Registration Section, Vocational, Rehabilitation and Education Division of said U. S. Veterans Administration, dated March 11, 1952, and marked as Exhibit D for the plaintiff;chanrobles virtual law library

5. That there has been no divorce, separation, dissolution or annulment of the marriage between the plaintiff and defendant Leoncio Cardenas up to the present; and chanrobles virtual law library

6. That the authorization of Rev. George W. Wright to solemnize marriage does not appear in the records of the Bureau of Public Libraries, as evidenced by Exhibit 1-A for the defendants; the said minister is no longer at his residence as mentioned in the marriage contract, Exhibit a, as evidenced by the fact that Exhibits 2 and 2-A were returned to sender; and that the office of the Local Civil Registrar of the City of Manila has no record of the marriage license of plaintiff and defendant Leoncio Cardenas, as evidenced by Exhibit 3 of the defendants.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Wherefore, plaintiff and defendants respectfully pray that judgment be rendered based on the above stipulation of facts, without-special pronouncements as to costs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Parties ask 10 days from today to file their respective memoranda.

Manila, Philippines, October 7, 1952.

(Sgd.) EULOGIA BIGORNIA DE Plaintiff	(Sgd.) LEONCIO CARDENASCARDENAS Defendant (Sgd.) FLORENCIA RINEN Defendant
(Sgd.) MARCELINO N. SAYO Counsel for plaintiff Suite 302 Calvo Building Escolta, Manila	(Sgd.) SIXTO BRILLANTES Attorney for the Defendants R-202 Digna Bldg., Manila

Exhibit "A"
MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE

Municipality of Malate, Province of Manila, July 10, 1927.

	Husband	Wife
Name	Leoncio Cardenas	Eulogia Bigornia
Age	32	24
Father	Quiterio Cardenas	Dominga Bigornia
Mother	Remigia Belo	Maria Tamayo
Consent of Residence	Fort McKinley	Bangued, Abra
Birthplace	Santa, Ilocos Sur	Bangued, Abra
Nationality	Filipino	Filipina
Occupation	Scout	Embroidery
Number of former marriages	One	None
Was former marriage dissolved by death or divorce, or annulled?	Death	None
Blood relationship, if any, existing between contracting parties	None	None

I hereby certify that I ascertained, previous to the solemnization of the marriage, the truth of the foregoing statements from the sworn testimony of the parties, and of the witnesses Esteban Ripan and Inocencia Rosario. I do further certify that Leoncio Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia above named, at my home, 11 Calle Wright, in Malate, Province of Manila, were with their mutual consent lawfully joined together in matrimony by me in the presence of Esteban Ripan of 16 H. Basco, and Inocencia Rosario of 16 H. Basco, attesting witnesses. And do further certify that the parties to this marriage are personally known to me and were satisfactorily identified by the oath of the witnesses, and that upon due inquiry by me made, there appeared to be no lawful impediment to the marriage.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Witness my hand this 10th day of July, 1927.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Contracting Parties:

(Sgd.) LEONCIO CARDENAS
(Sgd.) EULOGIA BIGORNIA(Sgd.)

GEORGE W. WRIGHT
Minister

Witnesses:

(Sgd.) ESTEBAN RIPAN
(Sgd.) INOCENCIA ROSARI

Exhibit "B" chanrobles virtual law library

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:chanrobles virtual law library

This is to certify that in the Register of Marriage, Series of 1948, under the custody of the Municipal Treasurer, Badoc, Ilocos Norte, there appears an entry of marriage, to wit:

Register No	42
Name of Husband	Leoncio Cardenas
Age	53
Birthplace	Santa, Ilocos Sur
Nationality	Filipino
Occupation	Phil. Scout
No. of former marriage	None
Blood relationship	None
Name of father	Quiterio Cardenas
Nationality	Filipino
Name of mother	Remigia Belo
Nationality	Filipino
Name of wife	Florencia Rinen
Age	29
Birthplace	Barrio 1, Badoc, Ilocos Norte
Nationality	Filipino
Occupation	Mun. Teacher
No. of former marriage	None
Blood relationship	None
Name of father	Laureano Olaycay
Nationality	Filipino
Name of mother	Juliana Rinen
Nationality	Filipino
Date of marriage	April 19, 1948
Place of marriage	Justice of the Peace
Solemnized by	Atty. Vicente R. Campos
Title	Judge
Remarks: Witnesses	Romualdo Calaylay Feliza L. Tolentino

The above is a true and correct copy from its original and in witness whereof, I hereby sign my name at Badoc, Ilocos Norte, this 27th day of July, 1951.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

(Sgd.) F. M. TOLENTINO
Municipal Treasurer

Upon this stipulation the Court rendered judgment declaring that the marriage between the defendants Leoncio Cardenas and Florencia Rinen entered into on 19 April 1948 is null and void ab initio. Costs were taxed against them. From this judgment the defendants appeal.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The appellants insist on their contention that there is nothing in the stipulation which shows that Minister George W. Wright had authority to solemnize the marriage between Leoncio Cardenas and Eulogia Bigornia; that it does not appear in the stipulation of facts that a marriage license was issued to enable them to marry.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

A marriage license as provided for in article 53, paragraph 4, of the new Civil Code and in section 7 of the Marriage Law (Act No. 3613), which took effect on 30 August 1950 and 4 December 1929, respectively, was not required by General Orders No. 68, the law in force on 10 July 1927 when the marriage was entered into by and between Cardenas and Bigornia. The marriage certificate attesting that a marriage ceremony was performed by a minister named George W. Wright gives rise to the presumption that all legal formalities required by law had been complied with the fulfilled. If the minister was not authorized to perform such marriage ceremony it was incumbent upon the defendants to show such lack of authority on the part of the minister.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

In disposing of this appeal we did not overlook article 88 of the new Civil Code which provides that "No judgment annulling a marriage shall be promulgated upon a stipulation of facts . . .." This article and article 101 on legal separation of the same Code contemplate the annulment of a marriage or legal separation where the parties might secure the annulment of their marriage or their legal separation by collusion. In this case the possibility of such collusion is remote, because the interest of the two wives are conflicting. Apart from this, the marriage certifiates attached to the stipulation of facts are evidence and cannot be deemed to be a stipulation of facts..chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The judgment appealed from is affirmed, with costs against the appellants..chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Paras, C. J., Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, and Reyes, J. B. L., JJ., concur..