G.R. No. 7890 - Pecson vs. Mediavillo

Prior to September 17, 1910, the last will and testament of Florencio Pecson was submitted to the Court of First Instance of Albay for probate.
Attorney Tomas Lorayes opposed the will's legalization, arguing it was neither authorized nor signed by the deceased as required by the Code of Civil Procedure.
On September 17, 1910, Judge Percy M. Moir found the will properly signed and executed, denying the opposition.

On September 18, 1910, Tomas Lorayes, representing Basiliso and Rosario Mediavillo, filed a motion alleging:

Rosario Mediavillo and her deceased brother Joaquin were legitimate grandchildren of Florencio Pecson through Teresa Pecson, Florencio's daughter.
Rosario was disinherited under clause 3 of the will for failing to show due respect to Florencio and raising her hand against him.
Rosario denied the alleged disrespect; if the incident occurred, it was due to mental derangement with periodic attacks.

The motion requested annulment of the disinheritance clause and inclusion of Rosario and Joaquin as participants in the estate.

The deceased had eight children with Nicolasa Manjares: Emerenciano, Teresa, Filomena, Asuncion, Rufino, Zoila, Emiliano, and Perfecto Pecson.
Rufino emigrated to Australia 25 years prior and was presumed dead; his share was to be divided among heirs.
Teresa married Basiliso Mediavillo; they had two children, Joaquin (deceased without succession) and Rosario (insane since 1895).
The court held Rosario was disinherited unjustly due to her mental incapacity at the time of the alleged offense; clause 3 was annulled.
The court ruled Rosario inherited half of her mother Teresa’s share; the other half (representing Joaquin’s share) rightfully belonged to his father, Basiliso.
Other siblings and descendants were declared heirs of Florencio Pecson’s estate.

Appeal and assignments of error by plaintiff (Filomena Pecson, administratrix)

First error: The court erred in annulling the disinheritance clause as contrary to law.
Second error: The court erred in awarding Basiliso Mediavillo, as representative of Joaquin, a share in the estate.

Whether the courts may inquire into the grounds of disinheritance to determine its validity under law.
Whether the lower court erred in nullifying the disinheritance of Rosario Mediavillo.
Whether Basiliso Mediavillo, as the father of a deceased son Joaquin, could inherit the latter’s share by representation.