Bohanan vs. Bohanan
Bohanan vs. Bohanan
Bohanan vs. Bohanan
LABRADOR, J.:
It does not appear that the order granting probate was ever
questioned on appeal. The executor filed a project of partition dated
January 24, 1956, making, in accordance with the provisions of the
will, the following adjudications: (1) one-half of the residuary estate,
to the Farmers and Merchants National Bank of Los Angeles,
California, U.S.A. in trust only for the benefit of testator's grandson
Edward George Bohanan, which consists of P90,819.67 in cash and
one-half in shares of stock of several mining companies; (2) the
other half of the residuary estate to the testator's brother, F. L.
Bohanan, and his
999
1000
"Every person over the age of eighteen years, of sound mind, may, by last
will, dispose of all his or her estate, real and personal, the same being-
chargeable with the payment of the testator's debts."
1001
In the proceedings for the probate of the will, it was found out and it
was decided that the testator was a citizen of the State of Nevada
because he had selected this as his domicile and his permanent
residence. (See Decision dated April 24, 1950,. supra). So the
question at issue is whether the testamentary dispositions, especially
those for the children which are short of the legitime given them by
the Civil Code of the Philippines, are valid. It is not disputed that the
laws of Nevada allow a testator to dispose of all his properties by
will (Sec. 9905, Compiled Nevada Laws of 1925, supra). It does not
appear that at the time of the hearing of the project of partition, the
above-quoted provision was introduced in evidence, as it was the
executor's duty to do. The law of Nevada, being a foreign law, can
only be
1002
1002 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED
Testate Estate of Bo Bohanan vs. Bohanan, et al.
proved in our courts in the form and manner provided for by our
Rules, which are as follows:
1003
Order affirmed.
____________