017 In the matter: Estate of Edward Randolph Hix, ISSUE: WON it is necessary for a probate proceeding to first prove
deceased. A.W Fleumer vs Annie Coushing Hix the existence of a foreign law.
FACTS:
A.W Fluemer was the special administrator of the estate of
Edward Randolph Hix.
o Upon Edward Hix death, he presented a document purpoting
to be the last will of the deceased for probate
o According to him, the alleged will was was executed in
Elkins, West Virginia, on November 3, 1925, by Hix who had
his residence in that jurisdiction, and that the laws of West
Virginia Code
However, the CFI denied the probate on the ground that before
a foreign law on the execution of a will may be admitted, such
law must first be established.
o The trial court emphasized that here was no was printed or
published under the authority of the State of West Virginia,
as provided in section 300 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Nor was the extract from the law attested by the certificate
of the officer having charge of the original, under the sale of
the State of West Virginia, as provided in section 301 of the
Code of Civil Procedure. No evidence was introduced to
show that the extract from the laws of West Virginia was in
force at the time the alleged will was executed.
Pending appeal, Fluemers counsel presented an unverified
pettion to be be admitted as evidence. One of these docs
discloses that a paper purporting to be the will was
presented for probate to the clerk of Randolph County,
State of West Virginia and that the forieng court, appointed
Claude Maxwell as the estates administrator.
HELD: YES. Judgement of the CFI was affirmed.
RULING:
Before a will executed in a foreign jurisdiction may be admitted
for probate in the Philippines, the following must first be
established.
o First, the foreign law must be proven as a fact.
o Second, its due execution- In the instant case, aside from
Fleumers testimony, no other evidence was presented to
indicate that the will was acknowledged by the testator in
the presence of two competent witnesses, of that these
witnesses subscribed the will in the presence of the
testator and of each other as the law of West Virginia
seems to require.
o Third, the fact that the testator had his domicile in West
Virginia must be established.
In the instant case, there was no showing that the book from
which an extract was taken was printed or published under the
authority of the state of West Virginia, as provided in Sec 30 of
the Code of Civil Procedure.
o Nor was the extract from the law attested by the
certificate of the officer having charge of the
original,under the seal of the State of West Virginia as
provided in Sec 301.
o No evidence wasintroduced showing that the extract from
the laws of West Virginia was in force at the
time alleged will was executed.
o The court therefore did not err in denying the probate
of the will.
o The existence of such law in West Virginia must be proved