Scribd
Upload
53 views2 pages

Bachrach v. Seifert G.R. No. L-2659, October 12, 1950

The case involved a dispute over stock dividends from a will. E.M. Bachrach left his wife Mary usufruct of the remainder of his estate. Upon her death, half was to go to his legal heirs. Mary petitioned the court for 54,000 shares representing a 50% stock dividend from Bachrach's company. The legal heirs opposed, arguing the stock dividend was part of the capital and not subject to usufruct. The court ruled the stock dividend was considered fruits under Philippine corporation law and the Civil Code, and therefore belonged to Mary as usufructuary.

Uploaded by

Christian Paul Lugo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
53 views2 pages

Bachrach v. Seifert G.R. No. L-2659, October 12, 1950

The case involved a dispute over stock dividends from a will. E.M. Bachrach left his wife Mary usufruct of the remainder of his estate. Upon her death, half was to go to his legal heirs. Mary petitioned the court for 54,000 shares representing a 50% stock dividend from Bachrach's company. The legal heirs opposed, arguing the stock dividend was part of the capital and not subject to usufruct. The court ruled the stock dividend was considered fruits under Philippine corporation law and the Civil Code, and therefore belonged to Mary as usufructuary.

Uploaded by

Christian Paul Lugo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Bachrach v.

Seifert
G.R. No. L-2659, October 12, 1950

1. E.M. Bachrach: …I also bequeath to my wife, 2. Mary: My husband’s estate will receive 3. Mary: I pray, as a usufructuary of the estate of
Mary, all the fruits and usufruct of the 54,000 shares of stock representing 50% stock my husband, the delivery of stock certificate
remainder of all my estate but upon her death, dividend of his 108,000 shares in Atok Mining representing 54,000 shares of stock in Atok
half of my estate will be divided among all my Company. I should petition for the delivery of Mining Company.
legal heirs… stock certificate on the basis of the will he left. RTC: Alright, but let us inform all other
interested parties first.

Setting: (Funeral home) Mary is sad because of


Setting: (Office) E.M. Bachrach is drafting a her husband’s passing away but must move on Setting: (Court) Judge in the middle and Mary is
will on his office table. with life. on the left side.

4. Seifert and Elianoff: We oppose! We all 5. Judge: Indeed, the stock dividends are not 6. In this case, the legal-heirs/oppositors banks on
know that the stock dividends are not severed severed from the corporate assets. However, our Massachusetts rule in that that stock dividends
from the corporate assets. Such forms part not Corporation Law states that all dividends forms part of the capital; therefore, is not subject
of income but of capital; therefore, it belongs declared represents surplus profits/fruits. In to usufruct because usufruct only has fruits as its
not to the usufructuary but to us, the legal heirs addition, the Civil Code provides that the object. The Court disagreed and said that
of E.M. Bachrach. usufructuary (Mary) shall be entitled to receive Pennsylvania rule is more in accord with our
all the fruits (stock dividend) of the property in corporation law which states that all dividends are
usufruct. considered fruits. Therefore, the 54,000 shares of
stock, as fruits, are covered by Art. 560, Civil
Code in that they belong to Mary, the
usufructuary.

Setting: (Court) Judge and Mary are still in their Setting: (Court) Mary, Seifert and Elianoff are
respective places but Seifert and Elianoff now seated in their respective sides and the
appeared on the right side. judge now makes the decision.
Christian Paul Lugo

You might also like