G.R. No. 6801 - Bagtas vs. Paguio

Case Summary (G.R. No. 6801)

Procedural Posture

Appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of the Province of Bataan admitting the instrument offered by the executrix to probate as the last will and testament of the decedent. Appellants contested probate on two grounds: (1) noncompliance with statutory formalities for wills, and (2) lack of testamentary capacity of the testator at the time of execution.

Applicable Constitutional/Legal Framework

The opinion applies the laws and procedural rules in force at the time of decision, specifically the statutory and procedural provisions governing testamentary formalities (the Code of Civil Procedure and related authorities referenced by the court). Because the decision predates 1990, the court applied the legal framework and authorities operative in 1912 as reflected in the decision.

Facts Concerning Execution and Manner of Preparation

The testator, handicapped by long-standing left-side paralysis, impaired hearing, and loss of speech, nevertheless retained use of his right hand and the ability to write. According to uncontroverted testimony from three subscribing witnesses and Florentino Ramos, the testator prepared notes on separate pieces of paper stating his dispositions, delivered those notes to Señor Marco who transcribed them into the will, and the transcribed will was read aloud in the presence of the testator and the witnesses. On each reading the testator indicated assent by affirmative movements of his head. After the attorney presented the completed document to the testator and the testator reviewed it, the testator signed the will in the presence of the four subscribing witnesses, who then subscribed it in the presence of the testator and of one another. The writing and execution process was said to occupy several hours and the testator was present and active throughout.

Court’s Finding on Formalities

The court agreed with the trial court that the formalities required by the Code of Civil Procedure for the execution of wills were fully complied with. The sequence of transcription by the attorney, oral readings, the testator’s affirmative manifestations, and the actual signing by the testator and the four subscribing witnesses satisfied the statutory requisites for a validly executed will.

Evidence Concerning Mental Capacity

Considerable evidence was introduced regarding the testator’s mental condition. Witnesses’ testimony varied: one attesting witness explicitly testified the testator “was in his right mind” and successfully communicated his wishes by head movements; another attesting witness declined to opine on the testator’s mental soundness because he was not a physician and had known the testator to be ill for years; the third attesting witness (Pedro Paguio), who testified for the opponents, could not affirm that the will expressed the testator’s true wish, basing his doubt on the testator’s infirmity, advanced age, and muteness, although he acknowledged the testator signed the will and verified his own subscription. Florentino Ramos corroborated the mechanics of execution and testified that he had frequently transacted the decedent’s business, written letters, and prepared inventories on the testator’s behalf, and that the decedent was able to communicate by writing. Two physicians for the opponents testified: Dr. Basa, who had treated the testator years earlier for cerebral congestion and paralysis, observed some mental disorder but did not state that the testator lacked testamentary capacity at the time of execution; Dr. Viado offered opinion in response to a hypothetical and admitted he had never examined the decedent and could not certify the mental condition of a person at the time of execution.

Legal Standard for Testamentary Capacity and Burden of Proof

The court reiterated the presumption in favor of testamentary capacity and placed the burden on contestants to prove lack of capacity. Citing prior Philippine decisions and established authorities, the court emphasized that perfect mental soundness is not required to make a valid will. The proper test is whether the testator possessed a “disposing memory” sufficient to understand the nature and extent of property, the objects of his bounty, and the distribution he intended to effect at the time of execution. The authorities quoted and relied upon (both Philippine precedents and recognized treatises and decisions) emphasize that mere age, infirmity, disease, or diminished faculties do not alone establish in

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 6801)

Citation and Procedural Posture

Reported at 22 Phil. 227; G.R. No. 6801; decided March 14, 1912.
Appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of the Province of Bataan admitting to probate a document offered as the last will and testament of Pioquinto Paguio y Pizarro.
The will was propounded by the executrix, Juliana Bagtas (the widow of the decedent).
Opponents (appellants) to probate: a son and several grandchildren by a former marriage (the grandchildren being children of a deceased daughter).
Issues presented on appeal: (1) whether the will was executed in conformity with the formalities and requirements of law governing wills; and (2) whether the testator lacked testamentary capacity at the time the will was executed.
Decision authored by Justice Trent; the order admitting the will to probate in the lower court was affirmed, with costs against the appellants. Chief Justice Arellano and Justices Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Carson, and Moreland concurred.

Relevant Dates and Places

Date of execution of the will: April 19, 1908, in the pueblo of Pilar, Province of Bataan.
Date of death of testator: September 28, 1909 (one year and five months after execution).

Testator: Physical and Communicative Condition (Background Facts)

For approximately 14–15 years prior to death the testator suffered paralysis of the left side of his body.
A few years prior to death his hearing became impaired and he lost the power of speech.
Owing to paralysis of certain muscles his head fell to one side and saliva ran from his mouth.
He retained the use of his right hand and was able to write fairly well.
The testator used signs to indicate his wishes to his wife and other family members.
The testator was not ever adjudged insane by a court of competent jurisdiction.

Persons Present at Execution and Availability of Testimony

Present at execution: four subscribing (testamentary) witnesses—Agustin Paguio, Anacleto Paguio, Francisco Paguio, and Pedro Paguio—an attorney, Señor Marco, and one Florentino Ramos.
Anacleto Paguio and the attorney Señor Marco had since died and thus their testimony was not available at trial in the lower court.
Testimony at trial was given by: the three surviving testamentary witnesses (Agustin, Francisco, Pedro) and Florentino Ramos. The deceased witnesses’ testimony was not before the lower court.

Manner and Process of Execution (Facts as to Formalities)

The testator wrote out notes and items regarding disposition of his property on pieces of paper.
The testator delivered these pieces of paper to Señor Marco, who transcribed them and put them in form as a will.
The attorney read the transcribed will to the testator, asking whether the contents were his testamentary dispositions.
The testator indicated assent by affirmative movement(s) of his head each time when asked.
After the attorney completed the will, it was read aloud in the presence of the testator and the witnesses.
Señor Marco gave the completed document to the testator; the testator, after inspecting it, signed it in the presence of the four subscribing witnesses.
The four subscribing witnesses then signed the document in the presence of the testator and of each other.
The lower court found, and the Supreme Court agreed, that the formalities prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure were fully complied with.

Witness Testimony Concerning Mental Capacity and Execution

One attesting witness testified that at the time of execution the testator "was in his right mind," and although seriously ill, indicated by head movements his wishes.
Another attesting witness stated he could not say whether the decedent had full use of his mental faculties because he had been ill for some years and the witness was not a physician.
Pedro Paguio (a subscribing witness) testified for the opponents and said he was unable to state whether the will reflected the wish of the testator; his reasons were the testator’s infirmity, advanced age, and inability to speak. Pedro also acknowledged that the testator signed the will and verified his (Pedro’s) own signature as subscribing witness.
Florentino Ramos, though not an attesting witness, testified that he was present at the execution, corroborated the manner of execution, and affirmed that the testator signed the will.
Ramos further testified that he frequently transacted business for the decedent, had written letters and made inventories of the testator’s property at the testator’s request, and that immediately before and after the execution of the will he had performed similar offices—indicating that the testator could communicate