Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 302 views

    Ilusorio V Ilusorio - GR 139789 &139808, 5-12-2000

    Uploaded by

    John Weekly
    Potenciano Ilusorio, an 86-year old lawyer, separated from his wife Erlinda in 1972. In 1998, Erlinda filed for guardianship over Potenciano claiming his poor health, but he did not want to live with her. Erlinda filed a habeas corpus petition to force Potenciano to live with her, which was denied because courts cannot compel a husband to live with his wife against his will. Erlinda was also granted visitation rights by a lower court, but the Supreme Court overturned this, as it would violate Potenciano's right to privacy since he did not want visits from his wife.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Ilusorio V Ilusorio - GR 139789 &139808, 5-12-2000

    Uploaded by

    John Weekly
    302 views1 page
    Potenciano Ilusorio, an 86-year old lawyer, separated from his wife Erlinda in 1972. In 1998, Erlinda filed for guardianship over Potenciano claiming his poor health, but he did not want to live with her. Erlinda filed a habeas corpus petition to force Potenciano to live with her, which was denied because courts cannot compel a husband to live with his wife against his will. Erlinda was also granted visitation rights by a lower court, but the Supreme Court overturned this, as it would violate Potenciano's right to privacy since he did not want visits from his wife.

    Original Description:

    Digest

    Original Title

    Ilusorio v Ilusorio - GR 139789 &139808, 5-12-2000

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Potenciano Ilusorio, an 86-year old lawyer, separated from his wife Erlinda in 1972. In 1998, Erlinda filed for guardianship over Potenciano claiming his poor health, but he did not want to live with her. Erlinda filed a habeas corpus petition to force Potenciano to live with her, which was denied because courts cannot compel a husband to live with his wife against his will. Erlinda was also granted visitation rights by a lower court, but the Supreme Court overturned this, as it would violate Potenciano's right to privacy since he did not want visits from his wife.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    302 views1 page

    Ilusorio V Ilusorio - GR 139789 &139808, 5-12-2000

    Uploaded by

    John Weekly
    Potenciano Ilusorio, an 86-year old lawyer, separated from his wife Erlinda in 1972. In 1998, Erlinda filed for guardianship over Potenciano claiming his poor health, but he did not want to live with her. Erlinda filed a habeas corpus petition to force Potenciano to live with her, which was denied because courts cannot compel a husband to live with his wife against his will. Erlinda was also granted visitation rights by a lower court, but the Supreme Court overturned this, as it would violate Potenciano's right to privacy since he did not want visits from his wife.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Erlinda Ilusorio v.

    Erlinda Bildner & Sylvia Ilusorio, John Doe & Jane Doe – GR No 139789, 05/12/2000
    Potenciano Ilusorio, Erlinda Bildner & Silvia Ilusorio v. CA & Erlinda Ilusorio – GR No 139808, 05/12/2000

    Facts: Laywer Potenciano Ilusorio 86 years old and possessed property valued at millions. He was
    chairman and president of Baguio Country Club. Erlinda Ilusorio is his wife.

    They were married on Jul 11 ’42 and lived together for 30 years. In 1972, they separated from bed and
    board for undisclosed reasons. Potenciano lived at Urdaneta Condo Makati while in Manila and at Ilusorio
    Penthouse, Baguio Country Club when he was in Baguio. Erlinda lived in Antipolo.

    They had 6 children: Ramon Ilusorio (55), Erlinda Ilusorio Bildner (52), Maximo (50), Sylvia (49), Marietta
    (48), and Shereen (39).

    On Dec 30 ’97, Potenciano returned from the US and stayed with Erlinda for 5 months in Antipolo. Sylvia
    and Erlinda Bildner alleged that their mother overdosed Potenciano with 200mg instead of 100m of Zoloft;
    an antidepressant drug prescribed to him in New York. Potenciano’s health deteriorated.

    On Feb 25 ’98, Erlinda filed with Antipolo RTC for guardianship over the Potenciano and his property due
    to his old age, frail health, poor eyesight, and impaired judgment

    On May 31 ’98, Potenciano returned from a corp. meeting in Baguio but did not return to Antipolo.
    Instead, he lived at Cleveland Condo Makati.

    On March 11 ’99 Erlinda filed with CA a for habeas corpus to have custody of Potenciano; having alleged
    that BIldner and Sylvia refused her demands to visit her husband and prohibited Potenciano from
    returning to Antipolo. CA denied her petition for habeas corpus but granted visitation rights.

    Erlinda then files with SC for reversal; while Potenciano wanted to annul visitation rights.

    Issue: (1) May Erlinda secure a writ of habeas corpus to compel her husband to live with her in conjugal
    bliss? (2) Is Erlinda entitled to visitation rights?

    Held: (1) No, marital rights including overture and living in conjugal dwelling may not be enforced by the
    extra-ordinary writ of habeas corpus. No court is empowered as a judicial authority to compel a husband
    to live with his wife. This is a matter beyond judicial authority and is best left to one’s free choice. To
    compel him would deprive him of liberty. Art. 68 FC may also say that living together is a personal act
    where it cannot be demanded so by court.

    (2) CA exceeded its authority in granting visitation rights when there is refusal from a sane man who didn’t
    want to be visited by his wife. To allow Erlinda visitation rights would violate his fundamental right to
    privacy

    Wherefore, in GR 139789, the petition is dismissed for lack of merit. No costs. Additionally, in GR 139808,
    petition is granted and nullifies the CA’s decision to grant visitation rights. No costs.

    A writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases of illegal confinement or detention, or which the rightful
    custody of a person is withheld from the one entitled thereto.

    "Habeas corpus is a writ directed to the person detaining another, commanding him to produce the body
    of the prisoner at a designated time and place, with the day and cause of his capture and detention, to
    do, submit to, and receive whatsoever the court or judge awarding the writ shall consider in that behalf."

    You might also like