Case Digest (G.R. No. 1708)
Facts:
Ex parte Pedro Arcenas, Felisberta Acevedo et al., G.R. No. 1708, August 24, 1905, the Supreme Court (En Banc), Torres, J., writing for the Court. On October 12, 1901, in Capiz, Jose de los Santos e Isada presented to Notary Public Felipe Villasis y Castaneda a private document purporting to be his last will and testament and acknowledged it before the notary and three witnesses; because of ill health the testator did not sign, and one witness, Naval Amisola Vidal y Reyes, at the testator’s request signed in his stead, while the other attesting witnesses and the notary also signed the instrument.Subsequently Pedro Arcenas, named as one of the executors, filed the document for probate in the Court of First Instance. The usual probate proceedings were conducted; interested parties were cited but did not appear to oppose. Two witnesses, Sandalio Garcia and Andres Protasio, testified that the testator had voluntarily executed the will, that he was unable to sign, and that Naval A. Vidal signed at the testator’s request, the attesting witnesses having subscribed in one another’s presence. The clerk also presented the register of public instruments showing the original will was recorded.
On September 28, 1902, the two heirs named in the will, Felisberta Acevedo and Jose Acevedo, petitioned the trial court to examine the notary Villasis and Naval Vidal regarding authenticity; the trial court did not act on that petition and, in a decision dated October 1, 1903, disallowed the will on the ground that it was neither signed by the testator nor by the testator’s name written by another person as required by Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The heirs appealed to this Court.
The Court reviewed the applicable law: the Code of Civil Procedure took effect October 1, 1901 (per Act No. 212), and Section 618 superseded the provision in the Civil Code (Art. 695) concerning signing by another at the testator’s request. Interpreting Section 618 (English text controlling under Act No. 63, Dec. 21, 1900), the Court ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of First Instance err in disallowing the will on the ground that it was not signed by the testator nor by the testator’s name written by another person as required by Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
- Can the erroneous Spanish translation (in earlier editions) or any ambiguity justify excusing noncompliance with the formal requirements of Section 618...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)