Title
Ortega vs. Valmonte
Case
G.R. No. 157451
Decision Date
Dec 16, 2005
Retired Filipino Placido Valmonte's will, favoring his young wife, faced opposition over alleged incapacity and fraud. Supreme Court upheld its validity, affirming testamentary capacity and proper execution.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 157451)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of the Testator and His Estate
    • Placido Valmonte, Fil-American pensionado, returned to the Philippines in 1980 and co-owned a house and lot in Makati (TCT No. 123468) with his sister Ciriaca.
    • At age 80, on February 5, 1982, he married Josefina Cabansag (then 28) and lived alternately in Bacnotan, La Union, and Makati until his death on October 8, 1984 (cause: cor pulmonale).
  • The Last Will and Testament
    • Drafted by Atty. Floro Sarmiento in Quezon City, dated June 15, 1983, but formally executed and acknowledged on August 9, 1983, in the presence of three witnesses (Eugenio Gomez Jr., Feliza Gomez, Josie Collado).
    • Dispositions: burial in a Catholic cemetery; one-half interest in the Makati property and 2-storey building to wife Josefina; residue of all real and personal property (including U.S. bank accounts) also to wife; appoints wife sole executrix, bond waived.
  • Opposition and Trial Court Findings
    • Opposed by Leticia Valmonte (testator’s relative) on grounds of non-enumeration of U.S. assets, failure to notify heirs, non-compliance with formalities, testator’s mental incapacity, undue influence, duress, fraud.
    • At trial, proponent Josefina and the notary and attesting witnesses testified to due execution and testamentary capacity; oppositor Leticia and her daughter Mary Jane Ortega testified as to Placido’s senility.
    • The Regional Trial Court disallowed probate, finding non-compliance with formalities and advanced senility at execution.
  • Court of Appeals Decision
    • Reversed the trial court: held formal requirements duly observed, the date variance explained, and the testator had testamentary capacity.
    • Ordered issuance of letters testamentary to Josefina. Corte Suprema denied Leticia’s motion for reconsideration.

Issues:

  • Are the findings of the probate court (trial court) entitled to great respect?
  • Was Placido Valmonte’s signature on the will procured by fraud or trickery, negating his intent?
  • Did Placido Valmonte possess testamentary capacity at the time of execution of the will?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.