Case Digest (G.R. No. 47731)
Facts:
Quintina R. Sabado v. Leoncia Fernandez, G.R. No. 47731, June 27, 1941, the Supreme Court En Banc, Laurel, J., writing for the Court. Hermogenes R. Sabado died on March 13, 1938, having executed a one‑page will (offered in evidence as Exhibit A). He left no descendants or ascendants. His sister, Quintina E. Sabado (the movant/appellant), sought probate of the will; the widow, Leoncia Fernandez (the oppositor/appellee), opposed probate.The attestation clause of the will, signed by three witnesses, recited that the witnesses knew the testator, that “he signed the foregoing testament in our presence and we sign the same in the presence of each of us,” and recorded that the testament had been read to and understood by the testator. No question was raised as to the authenticity of signatures, and no charge of fraud or bad faith was asserted. The parties stipulated that the testator and the witnesses signed each and every page (Record on Appeal, stipulation, pp. 10, 14–15).
The Court of First Instance of Pangasinan disallowed the will on the ground that the attestation clause failed to state that the witnesses signed the will in the presence of the testator as required by section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The movant appealed; the Court of Appeals certified the case to the Supreme Court under section 145‑H of the Revised Administrative Code, as amended by Commonwealth Act No. 3. The Supreme Court rendered the decis...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in disallowing the will because the attestation clause did not explicitly state, in literal terms, that the witnesses signed in the presence of the testator as required by Section 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure?
- If the attestation clause is imperfect, should the will nevertheless be admitted to probate under the rule of substantial compliance given the surrounding c...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)