ROSALIO BONILLA (a minor) SALVACION succession are transmitted from the moment of

BONILLA (a minor) and PONCIANO BONILLA the death of the decedent." When Fortunata
(their father) who represents the minors, Barcena, therefore, died her claim or right to the
petitioners, parcels of land in litigation, was not extinguished
vs. by her death but was transmitted to her heirs
LEON BARCENA, MAXIMA ARIAS BALLENA, upon her death. Her heirs have thus acquired
ESPERANZA BARCENA, MANUEL BARCENA, interest in the properties in litigation and became
AGUSTINA NERI, widow of JULIAN TAMAYO and parties in interest in the case. In addition, Under
HON. LEOPOLDO GIRONELLA, respondents. Section 17, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court "after a
G.R. No. L-41715 June 18, 1976 party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished,
MARTIN J. the court shall order, upon proper notice, the legal
TOPIC: OPENING OF SUCCESSION representative of the deceased to appear and be
FACTS: On March 31, 1975 Fortunata Barcena, substituted for the deceased, within such time as
mother of minors Rosalio Bonilla and Salvacion may be granted." The question as to whether an
Bonilla and wife of Ponciano Bonilla, instituted a action survives or not depends on the nature of
civil action in the Court of First Instance of Abra, to the action and the damage sued for. The claim of
quiet title over certain parcels of land located in the deceased plaintiff which is an action to quiet
Abra. The herein defendants then filed a written title over the parcels of land in litigation affects
motion to dismiss the complaint, but before the primarily and principally property and property
hearing of the said motion, the plaintiff’s counsel rights and therefore is one that survives even
moved to amend the complaint which was granted. after her death. It is, therefore, the duty of the
The defendants again filed another motion to respondent Court to order the legal representative
dismiss the complaint. The said motion to dismiss of the deceased plaintiff to appear and to be
was then heard. On August 19, 1975, plaintiff’s substituted for her. Thus, the action in the instant
counsel received a copy of the order dismissing the case survives.
complaint and on the 23rd of the same month; he
moved to set aside the said order. The court denied DISPOSITIVE: IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the
the MR filed by the plaintiff’s counsel which the order of the respondent Court dismissing the
counsel later on filed a written manifestation complaint in Civil Case No. 856 of the Court of First
allowing the minor petitioners to be allowed to Instance of Abra and the motions for
substitute their deceased mother. From the order, reconsideration of the order of dismissal of said
the plaintiff’s counsel filed a second MR of the complaint are set aside and the respondent Court is
order dismissing the complaint but the same was hereby directed to allow the substitution of the
denied. Hence, this present petition for review. minor children, who are the petitioners therein for
the deceased plaintiff and to appoint a qualified
ISSUE: WON the action survives even after the person as guardian ad litem for them. Without
death of a party during the pendency of the case. pronouncement as to costs.
YES
SULPICIA JIMENEZ and TORIBIO MATIAS,
HELD: While it is true that a person who is dead petitioners,
cannot sue in court, yet he can be substituted by his vs. VICENTE FERNANDEZ alias HOSPICIO
heirs in pursuing the case up to its completion. FERNANDEZ and TEODORA GRADO, respondents.
Under Section 16, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court G.R. No. L-46364 April 6, 1990
"whenever a party to a pending case dies, it shall be TOPIC: LAW GOVERNING INTRINSIC VALIDITY AS
the duty of his attorney to inform the court TO TIME OF EXECUTION
promptly of such death, and to give the name and FACTS: The entire parcel of land with an area of
residence of his executor, administrator, guardian or 2,932 square meters, formerly belonged to Fermin
other legal representatives." Moreover, Article 777 Jimenez. Fermin Jimenez has two (2) sons named
of the Civil Code provides "that the rights to the Fortunato and Carlos Jimenez. This Fortunato
Jimenez who predeceased his father has only one Cagampan that portion of the property subject of
child, the petitioner Sulpicia Jimenez. After the this petition.
death of Fermin Jimenez, the entire parcel of land It is well-settled in this jurisdiction that the
was registered under Act 496 in the name of Carlos rights to the succession are transmitted from the
Jimenez and Sulpicia Jimenez (uncle and niece) in moment of the death of the decedent (Art. 777, Civil
equal shares pro-indiviso. Code). Moreover, Art. 2263 of the Civil Code
Carlos Jimenez died on July 9, 1936 and his provides as follows: Rights to the inheritance of a
illegitimate daughter, Melecia Cayabyab, also known person who died with or without a will, before
as Melecia Jimenez, took possession of the eastern the effectivity of this Code, shall be governed by
portion of the property consisting of 436 square the Civil Code of 1889, by other previous laws,
meters. and by the Rules of Court . . . (Rollo, p. 17)
On January 20, 1944, Melecia Jimenez sold Thus, since Carlos Jimenez, died on July 9,
said 436 square meter-portion of the property to 1936 way before the effectivity of the Civil Code
Edilberto Cagampan and defendant Teodora Grado of the Philippines, the successional rights
executed a contract whereby the former transferred pertaining to his estate must be determined in
said 436 square meter-portion to the latter, who has accordance with the Civil Code of 1889.
been in occupation since. Citing the case of Cid v. Burnaman wherein this
On August 29, 1969, plaintiff Sulpicia Jimenez Court categorically held that:
executed an affidavit adjudicating unto herself the To be an heir under the rules of Civil Code
other half of the property appertaining to Carlos of 1889, a child must be either a child legitimate,
Jimenez, upon manifestation that she is the only legitimated, or adopted, or else an acknowledged
heir of her deceased uncle. Consequently Transfer natural child — for illegitimate not natural are
Certificate of Title No. 82275 was issued on October disqualified to inherit. (Civil Code of 1889, Art.
1, 1969 in petitioner's name alone over the entire 807, 935)
2,932 square meter property. Even assuming that Melecia Cayabyab was
On April 1, 1970, Sulpicia Jimenez instituted born out of the common-law-relationship between
the present action for the recovery of the eastern her mother (Maria) and Carlos Jimenez, she could
portion of the property consisting of 436 square not even be considered an acknowledged natural
meters occupied by defendant Teodora Grado. child because Carlos Jimenez was then legally
Lower courts dismissed the complaint hence married to Susana Abalos and therefore not
this petition. qualified to marry Maria and consequently
Melecia Cayabyab was an illegitimate spurious
ISSUES: WON Melecia Cayabyab had any right over child and not entitled to any successional rights
the eastern part of the property she took possession in so far as the estate of Carlos Jimenez was
of and later sold? No. concerned.
Melecia Cayabyab in the absence of any
HELD: From the start the respondent court erred in voluntary conveyance to her by Carlos Jimenez or
not declaring that Melecia Jimenez Cayabyab also Sulpicia Jimenez of the litigated portion of the land
known as Melecia Jimenez, is not the daughter of could not even legally transfer the parcel of land to
Carlos Jimenez and therefore, had no right over the Edilberto Cagampan who accordingly, could not
property in question. Respondents failed to present also legally transfer the same to herein private
concrete evidence to prove that Melecia Cayabyab respondents.
was really the daughter of Carlos Jimenez.
Nonetheless, assuming for the sake of argument DISPOSITIVE PORTION: WHEREFORE, the Petition
that Melecia Cayabyab was the illegitimate daughter for Review is hereby GRANTED. The Decision and
of Carlos Jimenez there can be no question that Resolution dated March 1, 1977 and June 3, 1977 in
Melecia Cayabyab had no right to succeed to the CA G.R. No. L-49178-R are SET ASIDE.
estate of Carlos Jimenez and could not have validly
acquired, nor legally transferred to Edilberto
 IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE Identification of such paper as the will which was
PROBATE OF THE WILL OF DOROTEA PEREZ, executed by the testator.
(deceased): APOLONIO TABOADA, petitioner, Insofar as the requirement of subscription is
vs. concerned, it is our considered view that the will in
HON. AVELINO S. ROSAL, respondent. this case was subscribed in a manner which fully
G.R. No. L-36033 November 5, 1982 satisfies the purpose of Identification.
GUTIERREZ, JR. J.: The signatures of the instrumental
TOPIC: FORMAL REQUISITES OF NOTARIAL WILL witnesses on the left margin of the first page of
(SIGNATURE ON EVERY PAGE) the will attested not only to the genuineness of
the signature of the testatrix but also the due
FACTS: In the petition for probate filed with the execution of the will as embodied in the
respondent court, the petitioner attached the attestation clause.
alleged last will and testament of the late Dorotea While perfection in the drafting of a will may
Perez. Written in the Cebuano-Visayan dialect, the be desirable, unsubstantial departure from the usual
will consists of two pages. The first page contains forms should be ignored, especially where the
the entire testamentary dispositions and is signed at authenticity of the will is not assailed.
the end or bottom of the page by the testatrix The law is to be liberally construed, "the
alone and at the left hand margin by the three (3) underlying and fundamental objective permeating
instrumental witnesses. The second page which the provisions on the law on wills in this project
contains the attestation clause and the consists in the liberalization of the manner of their
acknowledgment is signed at the end of the execution with the end in view of giving the testator
attestation clause by the three (3) attesting more freedom in expressing his last wishes but with
witnesses and at the left hand margin by the sufficient safeguards and restrictions to prevent the
testatrix. commission of fraud and the exercise of undue and
improper pressure and influence upon the testator.
The trial court, thru then Presiding Judge Ramon C. This objective is in accord with the modern
Pamatian issued the questioned order denying the tendency in respect to the formalities in the
probate of the will of Dorotea Perez for want of a execution of a will" (Report of the Code commission,
formality in its execution. p. 103).
Parenthetically, Judge Ramon C. Pamatian
ISSUE: WON the will should be admitted to probate. stated in his questioned order that were not for the
YES! defect in the place of signatures of the witnesses,
he would have found the testimony sufficient to
HELD: Article 805 of the Civil Code, the will must be establish the validity of the will.
subscribed or signed at its end by the testator The objects of attestation and of
himself or by the testator's name written by another subscription were fully met and satisfied in the
person in his presence, and by his express direction, present case when the instrumental witnesses
and attested and subscribed by three or more signed at the left margin of the sole page which
credible witnesses in the presence of the testator contains all the testamentary dispositions,
and of one another. especially so when the will was properly
It must be noted that the law uses the terms Identified by subscribing witness Vicente Timkang
attested and subscribed Attestation consists in to be the same will executed by the testatrix.
witnessing the testator's execution of the will in There was no question of fraud or substitution
order to see and take note mentally that those behind the questioned order.
things are, done which the statute requires for the We have examined the will in question and
execution of a will and that the signature of the noticed that the attestation clause failed to state
testator exists as a fact. On the other hand, the number of pages used in writing the will. This
subscription is the signing of the witnesses' names would have been a fatal defect were it not for the
upon the same paper for the purpose of fact that, in this case, it is discernible from the
entire wig that it is really and actually composed also by its bearing the coincident imprint of the seal
of only two pages duly signed by the testatrix of the notary public before whom the testament
and her instrumental witnesses. As earlier stated, was ratified by testatrix and all three witnesses. The
the first page which contains the entirety of the law should not be so strictly and literally interpreted
testamentary dispositions is signed by the testatrix as to penalize the testatrix on account of the
at the end or at the bottom while the instrumental inadvertence of a single witness over whose
witnesses signed at the left margin. The other page conduct she had no control where the purpose of
which is marked as "Pagina dos" comprises the the law to guarantee the Identity of the testament
attestation clause and the acknowledgment. The and its component pages is sufficiently attained, no
acknowledgment itself states that "This Last Will and intentional or deliberate deviation existed, and the
Testament consists of two pages including this evidence on record attests to the fun observance of
page". the statutory requisites. Otherwise, as stated in Vda.
In Singson v. Florentino, et al. (92 Phil. 161, de Gil. Vs. Murciano, 49 Off. Gaz. 1459, at 1479
164), this Court made the following observations (decision on reconsideration) 'witnesses may
with respect to the purpose of the requirement that sabotage the will by muddling or bungling it or the
the attestation clause must state the number of attestation clause.
pages used:
The law referred to is article 618 of the Code DISPOSITIVE: WHEREFORE, the present petition is
of Civil Procedure, as amended by Act No. 2645, hereby granted. The orders of the respondent court
which requires that the attestation clause shall state which denied the probate of tile will, the motion for
the number of pages or sheets upon which the win reconsideration of the denial of probate, and the
is written, which requirement has been held to be motion for appointment of a special administrator
mandatory as an effective safeguard against the are set aside. The respondent court is ordered to
possibility of interpolation or omission of some of allow the probate of the wig and to conduct further
the pages of the will to the prejudice of the heirs to proceedings in accordance with this decision. No
whom the property is intended to be bequeathed pronouncement on costs.
The ratio decidendi of these cases seems to be that
the attestation clause must contain a statement of
the number of sheets or pages composing the will
and that if this is missing or is omitted, it will have
the effect of invalidating the will if the deficiency
cannot be supplied, not by evidence aliunde, but by
a consideration or examination of the will itself. But
here the situation is different. While the attestation
clause does not state the number of sheets or
pages upon which the will is written, however, the
last part of the body of the will contains a
statement that it is composed of eight pages, which
circumstance in our opinion takes this case out of
the rigid rule of construction and places it within
the realm of similar cases where a broad and more
liberal view has been adopted to prevent the will of
the testator from being defeated by purely technical
considerations.
Icasiano v. Icasiano has the following ruling
which applies a similar liberal approach:
Impossibility of substitution of this page is assured
not only (sic) the fact that the testatrix and two
other witnesses did sign the defective page, but