The estranged children of Olivia Yanson, founder of a prominent transport company, face another Christmas away from home. A Court of Appeals division has decided to execute arrest warrants for perjury and falsification of public documents against Olivia’s eldest daughter, Emily. This decision overrides a local court’s ruling and directs the initiation of criminal cases against Emily just before Christmas 2023.
Yanson Family Arrest Warrants: Inheritance Feud Intensifies
The 32-page decision, issued on October 21, 2023, and authored by Associate Justice Rogelio Largo, has overturned the earlier decision of the Regional Trial Court Branch 45. Directing it to carry out the arrest warrants against Emily. The charges stem from a complex family dispute over the estate of Ricardo B. Yanson Sr., the late patriarch, who passed away in 2015.
The Yanson family is currently divided into two factions, with Olivia and two of her children, Leo Rey and Ginnette, forming one faction. The other faction includes Emily, Roy, Celina, and Ricardo Jr. The rift deepened when Olivia disinherited Emily and her three siblings, designating Leo Rey and Ginnette as the universal heirs in her court-supervised will.
Emily and her three siblings, collectively referred to as the Y4 – Roy, Ricardo Jr, and Lourdes Celina – have been officially disinherited by their mother. Olivia Yanson, also known by her initials OVY or affectionately as Mommy Love, through a court-supervised will.
In Olivia Yanson’s testament, she designated her two other children, Leo Rey, the youngest, and Ginnette Dumancas, as universal heirs. Leo Rey, known as LRY, currently holds the positions of president and chief executive officer at Vallacar Transit Incorporated. The family’s prominent transport company.
Yanson Family Legal Crisis
A statement from the Y3, presumably a group representing Olivia and her chosen heirs, specifies that the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) has been instructed to lift the suspension and enforce arrest warrants in Criminal Case Nos. 21-09-36294 to 96 for perjury and Criminal Case No. 21-09-36299 to 301 for falsification of public documents against Emily. The directive also emphasizes the continuation of proceedings in these criminal cases, as outlined in the decision authored by Associate Justice Rogelio G. Largo.
The legal dispute originated from the familial discord over the estate of the late Yanson patriarch, Ricardo B. Yanson Sr., who passed away on October 25, 2015. The Yanson family finds itself divided into two factions – the first faction comprising Ricardo’s wife, Olivia, and their children Leo Rey and Ginnette. While the other faction is compose of Emily, Roy, Celina, and Ricardo Jr.
The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) alleged that Emily Yanson, in her capacity as the corporate secretary of Ceres Transport. Fabricated information in the 2017, 2018, and 2019 general information sheets (GIS). These alleged fabrications included falsely asserting herself and her sister Celina as stockholders and directors. While omitting their mother as a stockholder and director.
Quoting the Court of Appeals (CA), it was emphasized that Emily’s claim to stock ownership couldn’t be solely based on extrajudicial settlement deeds. The CA highlighted the necessity of corporate documents like the stock transfer book. And also certificate of stock as relevant evidence for asserting stock ownership.
The CA acknowledged the possibility of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) ruling in favor of the validity of extrajudicial settlement deeds. Validating Olivia’s waiver and Emily’s entitlement to disputed shares. However, the CA clarified that such a ruling wouldn’t automatically confer stockholder status upon Emily. Or validate the information on the general information sheets.
Referring to the legal precedent set in Puno v. Puno Enterprises Inc., the CA stressed that heirs do not automatically become stockholders upon a shareholder’s death. Stocks must be distribute through estate proceedings, with transfers meticulously recorded in the corporation’s books.
The CA asserted that legal procedures must be follow before an individual can rightfully claim stockholder status. Even if extrajudicial settlement deeds are deem valid, they don’t automatically confer stock ownership. The CA deemed Emily’s declaration of herself and Celina as stockholders premature and erroneous, stating that valid stock transfers must precede such claims.
Contrary to the Regional Trial Court’s findings, the CA opined that a basis exists for the criminal charges of perjury and falsification of public documents against Emily.