40.) LABRADOR V.

CA 184 SCRA 170

FACTS: Melecio died leaving behind a parcel of land to his

heirs. 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 Melecios 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. However, the CA on appeal denied
probate on the ground that it was undated.

ISSUE: W/N the alleged holographic will is dated, as

provided for in Article 810 of CC.

HELD: 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.

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. It states that 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. This clearly shows that
this is a unilateral act of Melecio who plainly knew that he
was executing a will.
65.) CAYETANO VS. LEONIDAS G.R. NO. L-54919, MAY 30,
1984
GENERAL RULE: Limited jurisdiction of the probate court
EXCEPTION: Where practical considerations demand that
the intrinsic validity of the will be passed upon, even before
it is probated, the court should meet the issues.
FACTS: Adoracion C. Campos died, leaving Hermogenes
Campos (father) and her sisters, Nenita Paguia, Remedios
Lopez, and Marieta Medina as the surviving heirs. As the
only compulsory heir is Hermogenes, he executed an

Affidavit of Adjudication, adjudicating unto himself the

entire estate of Adoracion.
Later that same year, Nenita filed a petition for reprobate of
a will, alleging among others that Adoracion was an
American citizen and that the will was executed in teh US.
Adoracion died in Manila while temporarily residing in
Malate.
While this case was still pending, Hermogenes died and left
a will, appointing Polly Cayetano as the executrix. Hence,
this case.
ISSUES:
Whether or not the will was valid
Whether or not the court has jurisdiction over probate
proceedings
HELD: As a general rule, the probate court's authority is
limited only to the extrinsic validity of the will, the due
execution thereof, the testatrix's testamentary capacity and
the compliance with the requisites or solemnities prescribed
by law. The intrinsic validity normally comes only after the
court has declared that the will has been duly
authenticated. However, where practical considerations
demand that the intrinsic validity of the will be passed upon,
even before it is probated, the court should meet the issues.
In this case, it was sufficiently established that
Adoracion was an American citizen and the law which
governs her will is the law of Pennsylvania, USA, which is
the national law of the decedent.
It is a settled rule that as regards the intrinsic validity
of the provisions of the will, the national law of the decedent
must apply.

AS TO THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION

The settlement of estate of Adoracion Campos was
correctly filed with the CFI of Manila where she had an
estate since it was alleged and proven that Adoracion at the
time of her death was a citizen and permanent resident of
Pennsylvania, USA and not a usual resident of Cavite.
Moreover, petitioner is now estopped from questioning
the jurisdiction of the probate court in the petition for relief.
It is a settled rule that a party cannot invoke the jurisdiction
of a court to secure affirmative relief, against his opponent
and after failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question
that same jurisdiction.

92.) WENCESLA CACHO VS. UDAN

G.R. NO. L-19996, APRIL 30, 1965
FACTS:
Silvina Udan, single, died leaving a will naming her son
Francisco and one Wencesla Cacho as her sole heirs, share
and share alike. Cacho then filed a petition to probate the
said Will which was opposed by the testators legitimate
brother, Rustico. Therafter, Francisco filed his opposition to
the probate of the Will while Rustico withdrew his
opposition. After Franciscos death, another legitimate
brother of the testator, John, together with Rustico, filed
their respective oppositions. Consequently, Cacho filed a
Motion to Dismiss the Oppositions filed by John and Rustico.
CFI issued an order disallowing the two oppositions for lack
of interest in the estate. The subsequent Motions for
Reconsiderations were denied hence, this appeal.
ISSUE:
Whether or not John and Rustico Udan may claim to be
heirs intestate of their legitimate sister, Silvina.
RULING:
It is clear from Article 988 and 1003 of the governing
Civil Code of the Philippines, in force at the time of the
death of the testatrix that the oppositor brothers may not
claim to be heirs intestate of their legitimate sister, Silvina.
Art. 988. In the absence of legitimate
descendants or ascendants, the illegitimate
children shall succeed to the entire estate of
the deceased.
Art. 1003. If there are no descendants,
ascendants, illegitimate children, or a
surviving spouse, the collateral relatives
shall succeed to the entire estate of the
deceased in accordance with the following
articles.
These legal provisions decree that collateral relatives of
one who died intestate inherit only in the absence of
descendants, ascendants, and illegitimate children. Albeit
the brothers and sister can concur with the widow or
widower, they do not concur, but are excluded by the
surviving children, legitimate or illegitimate.
Further, the death of Francisco does not improve the
situation of appellants. The rights acquired by the former
are only transmitted by his death to his own heirs at law not
to the appellants, who are legitimate brothers of his mother,
pursuant to Article 992.

Art. 992. An illegitimate child has no right to

inherit ab intestate from the legitimate
children and relatives of his father or
mother; nor shall such children or relatives
inherit
the
same
manner
from
the
illegitimate child.
However, the hearing on the probate must still proceed to
ascertain the rights of Cacho as testamentary heir.