- CASE DIGEST -
Labrador v.
CA
G.R. No.
L-83843-44, April 5, 1990
FACTS: Melecio Labrador died in the Municipality of Iba, province of
Zambales, where he was residing, leaving behind a parcel of land designated as
Lot No. 1916 under Original Certificate of Title No. P-1652, and the following
heirs, namely: Sagrado, Enrica, Cristobal, Jesus, Gaudencio, Josefina, Juliana,
Hilaria and Jovita, all surnamed Labrador, and a holographic will.
However, during probate proceedings, Jesus and Gaudencio filed an
opposition on the ground that the will has been extinguished by implication of
law alleging that before Melecio’s death, the land was sold to them evidenced
by TCT No. 21178. Jesus eventually sold it to Navat. Trial court admitted the
will to probate and declared the TCT null and void.
On appeal, oppositors principally alleges that the holographic will is undated,
since the date is not in its usual place found in normal writing. Date was only
mentioned in one of the dipositive provisions in the will. The CA on appeal
denied probate on the ground that it was undated.
ISSUE: Whether or not the alleged holographic will is
dated, in compliance with Article 810 for its validity.
RULING: YES. The law does not specify a particular location where the
date should be placed in the will. The only requirements are that the date be
in the will itself and executed in the hand of the testator.
It is worthy of note to quote the first paragraph of the second page of
the holographic will, viz:
And this is the day in which we agreed that we are
making the partitioning and assigning the respective assignment of the said
fishpond, and this being in the month of
March, 17th day, in the year 1968, and this decision and or instruction of
mine is the matter to be followed. And the one who made this writing is no
other than MELECIO LABRADOR, their father. (emphasis supplied)
The intention to show March 17 1968 as the date of the execution is
plain from the tenor of the succeeding words of the paragraph. This clearly shows
that the will was not an agreement but a unilateral act of Melecio Labrador who
plainly knew that what he was executing was a will. The act of partitioning and
the declaration that such partitioning as the testator's instruction or
decision to be followed reveal that Melecio Labrador was fully aware of the
nature of the estate property to be disposed of and of the character of the
testamentary act as a means to control the disposition of his estate.
The holographic will of Melecio Labrador is APPROVED and ALLOWED
probate.
Click to View Full Text of the Case
No comments:
Post a Comment