This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2006-03-31 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| In Uy v. Court of Appeals, [31] the Court allowed petitioners (who claimed to be the surviving legal spouse and the legitimate child of the decedent) to intervene in the intestate proceedings even after the parties had already submitted a compromise agreement involving the properties of the decedent, upon which the intestate court had issued a writ of execution. In setting aside the compromise agreement, the Court held that petitioners were indispensable parties and that "in the interest of adjudicating the whole controversy, petitioners" inclusion in the action for partition, given the circumstances, not only is preferable but rightly essential in the proper disposition of the case." [32] | |||||