Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1925 > December 1925 Decisions > G.R. No. 23894 December 3, 1925 - LEOCADIA DIMANLIG v. VICTORIA CUSI ET AL.

048 Phil 394:



[G.R. No. 23894. December 3, 1925. ]

In re will of Norberto Cusi, deceased. LEOCADIO DIMANLIG, Petitioner-Appellee, v. VICTORIA CUSI, ET AL., opponents-appellants.

P. Joya Admana for Appellants.

Cipriano B. Sarmiento for Appellee.


1. WILLS; EFFECTIVENESS OF; INCORPORATION IN PUBLIC DOCUMENT. — A will executed during the existence of a public disorder becomes void if, after the restoration of public order, it is not in corporated in a public document within the period fixed by article 703 of the Civil Code.



This is an appeal taken by Victoria Cusi, Vicente Cusi, Mamerto Cusi, Candelaria Cusi, Juliana Cusi and Miguel Cusi, from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Batangas, ordering the allowance and probate of the will executed by the deceased Norberto Cusi on April 3, 1900.

The appellants contend that the trial court "erred ordering document Exhibit B to be allowed to probate as the last will and testament of the deceased Norberto Cusi," for the chief reason that the provision of the second paragraph of article 703 of the Civil Code was not complied with, which provides: "If the testator dies within this period (two months), the will shall also be void, unless application is made within three months following his death to a competent court to have the will, whether it be oral or written, incorporated in a public document."cralaw virtua1aw library

The testator, Norberto Cusi died on August 3, 1900, in Batangas where public order had not yet been completely restored and the courts of justice under the new sovereignty were not as yet duly organized. Under that situation, all the heirs and legatees named in the will took possession of the property which was allotted to each in the will. On March 25, 1922, the herein opponents and appellants filed with the Court of First Instance of Batangas a motion praying that Ciriaca Cusi be ordered to present to the court the will of the deceased Norberto Cusi for the probate thereof.

The preponderance of the evidence shoes that Norberto Cusi was in imminent danger of death when he executed the will in question and continued to be in that state until his death. The only question to be decided is whether or not said requirement was dispensed with in view of the fact that Norberto Cusi died upon a time when a public disorder existed and it was impossible to incorporate the will in a public document. The legal provision upon this point is conclusive and makes no exception. While the law does not require an impossibility, upon the restoration of public order a proceeding must have been commenced in a competent court to comply with the requirement of the second paragraph of article 703 of the Civil Code above quoted. The impossibility to come into competent court, due to its inexistence, suspended the period fixed by the law for incorporating the will in public document, and began to run again as soon as public order was restored and the courts organized.

The foregoing is the opinion of the court. The writer hereof believes, however, that it is not amiss to state that as all the heirs and legatees named in the will took possession of the property which was allotted to each in the lifetime of the testator, without having questioned the validity of said will until the year 1924, when at the instance of the herein opponents and appellants, it was presented for probate, the latter cannot now question the partition made among themselves, because by their acts they have led one another to believe that they had a right to the portion allotted to each heir and legatee, and because by the lapse of ten years the title to the respective portion have prescribed in their favor (sec. 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure; Bargayo v. Camumot, 40 Phil., 857; 10 R. C. L., sec. 126; 40 Cyc., 1893).

For the foregoing, the judgment appealed from is reversed, and the will of Norberto Cusi is held void and of no effect, without special pronouncement as to costs. So ordered.

Avanceña, C.J., Street, Malcolm, Ostrand, Johns and Romualdez, JJ., concur.

Johnson, J., did not take part.

Back to Home | Back to Main

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review :

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line :

December-1925 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 23760 December 2, 1925 - K. D. LAW v. JOAQUIN NATIVIDAD

    048 Phil 370


    048 Phil 377

  • G.R. No. 24915 December 2, 1925 - AGNETE E. NOBLE v. PEDRO TUASON, ET AL.

    048 Phil 387

  • G.R. No. 23894 December 3, 1925 - LEOCADIA DIMANLIG v. VICTORIA CUSI ET AL.

    048 Phil 394

  • G.R. No. 23699 December 4, 1925 - JOSE L. RIVERA v. MAXIMO TRINIDAD

    048 Phil 396

  • G.R. No. 23729 December 5, 1925 - FLAVIANA SAMSON v. VICENTE CORRALES TAN, ET AL.

    048 Phil 401

  • G.R. No. 24125 December 5, 1925 - SOTERO P. FERMIN, ET AL. v. LEON PASE CARLOS

    048 Phil 406

  • G.R. No. 23340 December 7, 1925 - TEODORA ESTABILLO v. NICOLAS ESTABILLO

    048 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. 23599 December 7, 1925 - PHILIPPINE ENG’G. CO. v. ANTONIO E. ARGOSINO

    049 Phil 983

  • G.R. No. 24066 December 9, 1925 - VALENTIN SUSI v. ANGELA RAZON, ET AL.

    048 Phil 424

  • G.R. No. 23063 December 10, 1925 - J. F. OLIVER, ET AL. v. "LA VANGUARDIA, INC."cralaw virtua1aw library

    048 Phil 429

  • G.R. No. 23716 December 11, 1925 - DIRECTOR. OF LANDS, ET AL. v. MANUEL SANTOS, ET AL.

    048 Phil 437

  • G.R. No. 24532 December 11, 1925 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MATEO BERSABAL

    048 Phil 439

  • G.R. No. 23018 December 14, 1925 - LORENZO ZAYCO v. SALVADOR SERRA, ET AL.

    049 Phil 985

  • G.R. No. 24255 December 16, 1925 - AQUILES M. SAJO v. MERCEDES GUSTILO

    048 Phil 451

  • G.R. No. 24322 December 16, 1925 - H. R. ANDREAS v. B. A. GREEN

    048 Phil 463

  • G.R. No. 24486 December 16, 1925 - PHILIPPINE ENGINEERING CO. v. B. A. GREEN

    048 Phil 466

  • G.R. Nos. 24619 & 24620 December 16, 1925 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JULIAN NARGATAN

    048 Phil 470

  • G.R. No. 24690 December 16, 1925 - SMITH, BELL & CO., LTD. v. DAVID E. ELLIS

    048 Phil 475

  • G.R. No. 23979 December 18, 1925 - HUNTER, KERR & CO. v. SAMUEL MURRAY

    048 Phil 499

  • G.R. No. 24566 December 18, 1925 - EMILIANO S. SAÑO v. MAMERTO QUINTANA, ET AL.

    048 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. 23940 December 21, 1925 - PLACIDO ESCUDERO, ET AL. v. CORNELIO ESGUERRA

    048 Phil 511

  • G.R. No. 24931 December 22, 1925 - LUIS MORALES v. MANUEL DE LEON

    048 Phil 515

  • G.R. No. 24450 December 23, 1925 - BIAN HIN & CO. v. TAN BOMPING

    048 Phil 523

  • G.R. No. 24055 December 28, 1925 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CATALINO OSCAR

    048 Phil 527

  • G.R. No. 24488 December 28, 1925 - ASIA BANKING CORPORATION v. WALTER E. OLSEN & CO., INC., ET AL.

    048 Phil 529

  • G.R. No. 24507 December 28, 1925 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CELEDONIO DE LA CRUZ

    048 Phil 533

  • G.R. No. 24366 December 31, 1925 - EUGENIO JACINTO, ET AL. v. CELERINO B. ARELLANO, ET AL.

    048 Phil 570

  • G.R. No. 24433 December 31, 1925 - LEONOR WRIGHT DE DIOKNO, ET AL. v. CITY OF MANILA

    048 Phil 572

  • G.R. No. 23610 December 31, 1925 - HIJOS DE I. DE LA RAMA v. JUAN ABRAHAM, JR.

    048 Phil 563