Cases 1.docx

Fausto Gan vs. Ildelfonso Yap FACTS: On November 20,1951, Felicidad Esguerra died of heart failure in the University of Santo Tomas Hospital, leaving properties in Pulilan, Bulacan in the City of Manila. On March 17,1952 Fausto Gan initiated a petition for the probate of holographic will allegedly executed by the deceased and established its contents and due execution by a statement that on November 5,1951 that felicidad wrote, signed and dated a holographic will in the presence of her niece who was invited to read it and by a distant relative. The surviving husband IIdefonso Yap asserted that the deceased had not left any will, nor executed any testament during her life time and when the deceased found hardly breathing her husband and her personal attendant, Mrs. Bantique constantly at her side and these two persons swore that Mrs. Felicidad Esguerra made no will, and could have made no will on that day. ISSUE: 1.

WON HOLOGRAPHIC CAN BE PROBATED UPON THE TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES WHO HAVE ALLEGEDLY SEEN IT AND WHO DECLARED THAT IT WAS IN THE WRITING OF TESTATOR.

RULING: NO. Since the will was not presented, the court is in the opinion that the case should be decided not on the weakness of the opposition but on strength of the evidence of the petitioner who has the burden of proof. And that the authenticity and due execution is the dominant requirements to be fulfilled when such will is submitted to the courts for allowance. The court find confirmation of ideas in the decision of the Supreme Court of Spain in accordance with the provision of Civil Code (Spanish) “The will itself, whole and unmutilated, must be presented; otherwise it shall produce no effect.’’ And the evidence submitted by herein petitioner is so tainted with improbabilities and inconsistencies that it fails to measure up to that “clear and distinct” proof required by rule 77 sec.11. 17. Gan v. Yap FACTS: Gan filed a petition for probate of the holographic will allegedly executed by Felicidad Yap. Opposing the petition, her surviving husband, Ildefonso Yap asserted that the deceased had not left any will, nor executed any testament during her lifetime. The will itself was not presented. Petitioners tried to establish its contents and due execution by the statements of 4 witnesses who testified that Felicidad wrote, signed and dated a holographic will and that Felicidad allowed them to read the will. ISSUE: w/n a holographic will may be probated upon the testimony of witnesses. HELD: NO When the will itself is not submitted, the means of opposition, and of assessing the evidence are not available. And then the only guaranty of authenticity—the testator’s handwriting—has disappeared. Unlike holographic wills, ordinary wills may be proved by testimonial evidence when lost or destroyed. The difference lies in the nature of the wills:

Holographic will 1. guarantee of authenticity: the handwriting itself 2. if oral testimonies were admissible, only one man could engineer the whole fraud. 3. In case of a lost holographic will, the witnesses would testify as to their opinion of the handwriting which they allegedly saw, an opinion which cannot be tested in court because the handwriting itself is not at hand.

Ordinary will 1. guarantee of authenticity: testimony of the subscribing or instrumental witnesses 2. hard to convince 3 witnesses deliberately to lie. 3. In case of a lost will, the 3 subscribing witnesses would be testifying to a fact which they saw the act of the testator subscribing the will.

Rodelas v. Aranza Digest Rodelas v. Aranza G.R. No. L-58509 December 7, 1982 Relova, J. (Ponente)

Facts: 1. The appellant filed a petition for the probate of the holographic will of Ricardo Bonilla in 1977. The petition was opposed by the appellees on the ground that the deceased did not leave any will, holographic or otherwise. 2. The lower court dismissed the petition for probate and held that since the original will was lost, a photostatic copy cannot stand in the place of the original.

Issue: Whether or not a holographic will can be proved by means of a photocopy

RULING: Yes. A photocopy of the lost or destroyed holographic will may be admitted because the authenticity of the handwriting of the deceased can be determined by the probate court with the standard writings of the testator.

Nuguid v. Nuguid GR L-23445, June 23, 1966 FACTS: Rosario died single, without descendants, legitimate or illegitimate. Surviving were her legitimateparents, Felix and Paz, and 6 brothers and sisters. One of the siblings filed a holographic will allegedly executed by Rosario 11 years before her death and prayed that she be admitted to the probate and be appointed administrator. The parents opposed saying that they are the compulsory heirs of the decedent in the direct ascending line and that the will should be void on the ground of absolute preterition. ISSUE: Is the will void on the ground of preterition? RULING: YES. The decedent left no descendants, legitimate or illegitimate. But she left forced heirs in the direct ascending line her parents. And, the will completely omits both of them; thus receiving nothing by the testament, depriving them of their legitime; neither were they expressly disinherited. This is a clear case of preterition. Note that A. 854 of the NCC merely nullifies the “institution of heir”. Considering that the will presented solely provides for the institution of the petitioner as universal heir and nothing more, the result is the same. The will is null and void.