Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 48 views

    Garcia Vs Vazquez

    Uploaded by

    Abraham
    This case involves a will that was contested by alleged heirs of Gliceria Avelino del Rosario. The will was challenged on the grounds that del Rosario was essentially blind at the time of signing due to poor eyesight and a prior operation, and so could not have read the will herself as the witnesses claimed. Medical testimony established del Rosario's very limited vision. The Supreme Court ruled the will was not properly executed because as a blind person, del Rosario should have had the will read to her twice per the Civil Code, which did not occur. The will was invalid due to this failure to follow proper execution procedures for blind testators.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Garcia Vs Vazquez

    Uploaded by

    Abraham
    48 views1 page
    This case involves a will that was contested by alleged heirs of Gliceria Avelino del Rosario. The will was challenged on the grounds that del Rosario was essentially blind at the time of signing due to poor eyesight and a prior operation, and so could not have read the will herself as the witnesses claimed. Medical testimony established del Rosario's very limited vision. The Supreme Court ruled the will was not properly executed because as a blind person, del Rosario should have had the will read to her twice per the Civil Code, which did not occur. The will was invalid due to this failure to follow proper execution procedures for blind testators.

    Original Title

    Garcia vs Vazquez.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a will that was contested by alleged heirs of Gliceria Avelino del Rosario. The will was challenged on the grounds that del Rosario was essentially blind at the time of signing due to poor eyesight and a prior operation, and so could not have read the will herself as the witnesses claimed. Medical testimony established del Rosario's very limited vision. The Supreme Court ruled the will was not properly executed because as a blind person, del Rosario should have had the will read to her twice per the Civil Code, which did not occur. The will was invalid due to this failure to follow proper execution procedures for blind testators.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    48 views1 page

    Garcia Vs Vazquez

    Uploaded by

    Abraham
    This case involves a will that was contested by alleged heirs of Gliceria Avelino del Rosario. The will was challenged on the grounds that del Rosario was essentially blind at the time of signing due to poor eyesight and a prior operation, and so could not have read the will herself as the witnesses claimed. Medical testimony established del Rosario's very limited vision. The Supreme Court ruled the will was not properly executed because as a blind person, del Rosario should have had the will read to her twice per the Civil Code, which did not occur. The will was invalid due to this failure to follow proper execution procedures for blind testators.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Garcia vs.

    Vasquez
    GR No. L-26615
    April 30, 1970

    Facts

    Gliceria Avelino del Rosario died unmarried in the City of Manila leaving no descendants,
    ascendants, brother or sister. At the time of her death, she was said to be 90 years old more or less, and
    possessed of an estate consisting mostly of real properties. Consuelo S. Gonzales Vda. de Precilla, a
    niece of the deceased, petitioned the Court of First Instance of Manila for probate of the alleged last will
    and testament of del Rosario.

    The petition was opposed separately by several groups of alleged heirs as stated in wills
    previously executed by the deceased who all claimed to be relatives of the deceased within the fifth civil
    degree. The oppositions invariably charged that the instrument executed was not intended by the
    deceased to be her true will; and that the instrument itself reveals irregularities in its execution, and that
    the formalities required by law for such execution have not been complied with.

    Called to testify on the due execution of the will, instrumental witnesses Decena, Lopez and
    Rosales uniformly declared that they witnessed the execution of the last will. They testified that the
    testatrix was apparently of clear and sound mind and that the will, which was already prepared, was first
    read "silently" by the testatrix herself before she signed it.

    The oppositors-appellants in the present case, however, challenging the correctness of the
    probate court’s ruling, maintains that the eyesight of Gliceria del Rosario was so poor and defective that
    she could not have read the provisions of the will, contrary to the testimonies of witnesses Decena, Lopez
    and Rosales. The testimony of the ophthalmologist who treated the deceased of the actual condition of
    her eyesight fully establish the fact that notwithstanding the operation undergone by the deceased, her
    vision remained mainly for viewing distant objects and not for reading print. She was incapable of reading,
    and could not have read the provisions of the will supposedly signed by her. It is worth noting that the
    instrumental witnesses stated that she read the instrument "silently" which is a conclusion and not a fact.

    Issues
    Whether or not the will was properly executed.

    Ruling
    No. For all intents and purpose of the rules on probate, the deceased Gliceria del Rosario was, as
    appellant oppositors contend, a blind testator, and the due execution of her will would have required
    observance of the provisions of Article 808 of the Civil Code. Article. 808 of the Civil Code requires that if
    the testator is blind, the will shall be read to him twice; once, by one of the subscribing witnesses, and
    again, by the notary public before whom the will is acknowledged. virtua1aw library

    The rationale behind the requirement of reading the will to the testator if he is blind or incapable of
    reading the will himself is to make the provisions thereof known to him, so that he may be able to object if
    they are not in accordance with his wishes. That the aim of the law is to insure that the dispositions of the
    will are properly communicated to and understood by the handicapped testator, thus making them truly
    reflective of his desire, is evidenced by the requirement that the will should be read to the latter, not only
    once but twice, by two different persons, and that the witnesses have to act within the range of the
    testator’s other senses.

    In connection with the will here in question, there is nothing in the records to show that the above
    requisites have been complied with. Clearly, as already stated, the will sought to be probated suffers from
    infirmity that affects its due execution.

    You might also like