Petitioner
Concepcion Abella de Diaz
Respondent
Erlanger & Galinger
Citation
G.R. No. 38052
Court
Supreme Court
Division
Second Division
Ponente
Hull, J.
Decided
December 23, 1933

Summary

This 1933 Supreme Court case involved a marital property dispute arising from execution proceedings. When Erlanger & Galinger, Inc. obtained judgment against Domingo Diaz and levied on properties, his wife Concepcion claimed they were her paraphernal property exempt from execution. The trial court granted a permanent injunction protecting all levied properties. The Supreme Court partially affirmed, holding that buildings constructed on the wife's land with her private money were indeed paraphernal property under Civil Code Article 1404. However, the Court reversed regarding other items (palay, lumber, automobile), finding them to be conjugal property. Significantly, the Court ruled that the husband's electric light business venture was a conjugal partnership enterprise, not a personal obligation, making Article 1386's protection inapplicable. The decision clarified important distinctions between paraphernal and conjugal property rights.

Intellegal Wiki · Key Holding

Affirmed the deficiency sales-tax assessment, holding that a firm habitually manufacturing drums in the ordinary course of its business is a manufacturer subject to sales tax, not a mere contractor, under Article 1467, which treats contracts for goods manufactured in the ordinary course of business as contracts of sale regardless of who supplies the raw materials.

An editorially maintained summary of the rule this Supreme Court decision is cited for — not legal advice.

Statutes applied

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Related research

In-depth Intellegal research on the provisions this case applies.

Cases citing this case

Cases in our corpus that cite this decision.

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →

By the Intellegal Editorial Board · December 23, 1933

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →
AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.