Caneda v. CA

G.R. No. 103554, 28 May 1993, 222 SCRA 781 FACTS: On December 5, 1978, Mateo Caballero, a widower without any children and already in the twilight years of his life, executed a last will and testament at his residence before 3 witnesses. He was assisted by his lawyer, Atty. Emilio Lumontad. In the will, it [...]

By |2019-04-22T01:36:42+00:00April 22nd, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Alvarado v. Gaviola

G.R. No. 74695, 14 September 1993, 226 SCRA 348 FACTS: The testator did not read the final draft of the will himself. Instead, private respondent, as the lawyer who drafted the 8-paged document, read the same aloud in the presence of the testator, the 3 instrumental witnesses and the notary public. The latter 4 followed [...]

By |2019-04-22T01:32:28+00:00April 22nd, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Garcia v. Vasquez

G.R. No. L-26808, 28 March 1969, 32 SCRA 489 FACTS: Gliceria del Rosario executed 2 wills, one in June 1956, written in Spanish, a language she knew and spoke. The other will was executed in December 1960 consisting of only one page, and written in Tagalog. The witnesses to the 1960 will declared that the [...]

By |2019-04-22T01:23:21+00:00April 22nd, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Guerrero v. Bihis

G.R. No. 174144, 17 April 2007, 521 SCRA 39 FACTS: Felisa Buenaventura, mother of petitioner Bella Guerrero and respondent Resurreccion Bihis, died. Guerrero filed for probate in the RTC QC. Bihis opposed her elder sister’s petition on the following grounds: the will was not executed and attested as required by law; its attestation clause and [...]

By |2019-04-17T08:54:18+00:00April 17th, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Cruz v. Villasor

G.R. No. L-32213, 26 November 1973, 54 SCRA 31 FACTS: The CFI of Cebu allowed the probate of the will of Valenti Cruz. Petitioner Agapita Cruz, spouse of the decedent, however, opposed the allowance of such will alleging that it was executed through fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, and undue influence. She further alleged that the instrument [...]

By |2019-04-17T08:25:42+00:00April 17th, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Ortega v. Valmonte

G.R. No. 157451, 16 December 2005, 478 SCRA 247 FACTS: Two years after the arrival of Placido from the United States and at the age of 80 he wed Josefina who was then 28 years old. But in a little more than two years of wedded bliss, Placido died. Placido executed a notarial last will [...]

By |2019-04-17T06:55:11+00:00April 17th, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Azuela v. CA

G.R. No. 122880, 12 April 2006, 487 SCRA 119 FACTS: Petitioner Felix Azuela sought to admit to probate the notarial will of Eugenia E. Igsolo. However, this was opposed by Geralda Castillo, who was the attorney-in-fact of “the 12 legitimate heirs” of the decedent. According to her, the will was forged, and imbued with several [...]

By |2019-04-17T05:12:22+00:00April 17th, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Echavez v. Dozen Construction

G.R. No. 192916, 11 October 2010, 632 SCRA 594 FACTS: Vicente Echavez (Vicente) was the absolute owner of several lots in Cebu City, which includes Lot No. 1956-A and Lot No. 1959 (subject lots). On September 7, 1985, Vicente donated the subject lots to petitioner Manuel Echavez (Manuel) through a Deed of Donation Mortis Causa. [...]

By |2019-04-17T05:05:40+00:00April 17th, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Barut v. Cabacungan

G.R. No. L-6285, 15 February 1912, 21:461 FACTS: Barut applied for the probate of the will of deceased, Maria Salomon. The testatrix stated in the will that being unable to read or write, the will was read to her by Ciriaco Concepcion and Timotea Inoselda and that she had instructed Severo Agayan to sign her [...]

By |2019-04-17T03:09:38+00:00April 17th, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments

Nera v. Rimando

G.R. No. L-5971, 27 February 1911, 18 Phil. 450 FACTS: At the time the will was executed, in a large room connecting with a smaller room by a doorway where a curtain hangs across, one of the witnesses was in the outside room when the other witnesses were attaching their signatures to the instrument. The [...]

By |2019-04-23T05:58:31+00:00April 17th, 2019|Case Digests|0 Comments
Go to Top