Case ID: pr_16/html/0747-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Me. Justice MacLeaey", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Estate of García v. The Registrar of Property.
    Appeal from a, decision of the Registrar of Property of San Jnan, Section 2.
    No. 75.
    Decided November 14, 1910.
    Ganancial Property — Dissolution and Liquidation op Conjugal 'Partnership — Obligations Contracted by Wipe. — Until the conjugal partnership is dissolved and liquidated, the wife does not acquire any participation in the property thereof which is liable to attachment or execution for debts or obligations of a private character, other than those for which the property of the conjugal partnership may be liable, in accordance with section 1323 of the Civil Code.
    The facts are stated in the opinion.
    
      Mr. Eugenio Benitez Castaño for appellant.
   Me. Justice MacLeaey

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a case entirely similar to one between the same parties, bearing the No. 74, in which Mr. Justice Wolf delivered the opinion of the court on the 13th instant. In that appeal the ruling of the registrar was affirmed, as must be done here for the same .reasons.

The wife has no interest in the ganancial property of the marital partnership, which is subject to execution or attachment, until the marriage is dissolved and liquidation follows. (Civil Code, Sec. 1310. and 1337.)

The decisions rendered in the cases referred to in the opinion above-cited fully sustain this proposition. (Vivaldi Pacheco v. Domingo Mariani et ux., decided April 16, 1906, 3 Castro 215; Garrozi v. Dastas, 204 U. S., 79; Decision of the General Directorate of Registries, September 28, 1884; decision of the same body of April 24, 1879; judgments of the Supreme Court of Spain of October 20, 1880; February 25, 1885; and June 8, 1886; Reade v. De Lea, 95 Pac., 131.)

For the reasons stated the ruling of the registrar made herein must be affirmed.

7 Affirmed.

Chief Justice Hernández and Justices Wolf and del Toro concurred.