Request to reopen a probate that was closed 40 years ago denied

Superior Court Associate Judge Joseph N. Camacho denied yesterday a motion to re-open a probate of an estate of a deceased person that was closed 40 years ago.

Camacho ruled that the Probate Court balances the justifiable circumstances that will or should reopen a probate matter—such as property that was unintentionally omitted from the estate or to allow quiet title actions where property of the estate was misidentified and mistakenly distributed.

In this case, Camacho said, there is no evidence that any assets were inadvertently omitted from the Vicente Rebuenog estate, nor where there any mistakes made in probating the estate.

Probate court decisions should have a sense of finality, he said, so family members and their descendants shall have confidence of land ownership.

Equally important, Camacho said, there are other more suitable mechanisms available to Ignacia T. Saures to force the partition of an undivided property and does not require reopening a probate that was closed 40 years ago.

“Reopening a closed probate in essence requires the court to reach back in time and disturb a decision that has hardened over the years, a court decision that families, businesses and commercial entities have relied upon,” he said.

Camacho said the further back in time the probate was closed and finalized, the higher the probability of disruption the families, business and commercial entities’ expectations and reliance on the court’s decision.

According to court records, on Aug. 18, 1978, a court found Ignacia T. Pua (now Ignacia T. Saures) an heir of Vicente Rebuenog and entitled to a one-fifth share of the estate of Vicente Rebuenog.

The 1978 judgment further found that Adela Lifoifoi, Pedro Rebuenog, Teodore Selepeo, and Antonia Kani are natural children of Vicente Rebuenog. Each was entitled to a one-fifth share in the estate.

The judgment distributed a lot in Garapan containing one-third hectares to Ignacia Saures and the four children of Vicente Rebuenog.

On Oct. 19, 2017, Saures moved the court to reopen the matter for the purpose of amending the judgment of distribution to direct an equal partitioning of the Garapan lot among the five heirs.

Saures, through counsel Rosemond Santos, asked the court to reopen the probate to revisit the original ruling of undivided shares and “recognize [petitioner’s] partitioned share of the estate, and to delineate the heirs’ respective one-fifth share of the estate.”

The heirs of Adela Lifoifoi and Pedro Rebuenog appeared to voice their objection to petitioner’s motion to reopen case.

In denying the motion to reopen, Camacho emphasized that the court has all the necessary and proper power and authority to reopen a probate when justice requires.

However, Camacho said, the probate court weighs petitioner’s request to reopen a probate against the fact that petitioner has other less drastic legal mechanisms available.