1. AMADEA v.

AQUINO insane, his remedy is a special

proceeding to establish the fact or
✓
status of insanity calling for an
2. TREYES v. LARLAR appointment of guardianship.

✓ The determination of a ✓ Actions in personam:

decedent’s lawful heirs should be
- Declaration of nullity of a
made in the corresponding special
document
proceeding, precluding the RTC in
- Nullity of title
an ordinary action for cancellation
- Recovery of ownership of real
of title and reconveyance from
property
making the same.
- Reconveyance
✓ Special proceeding – an
6. URETA v. URETA
application or proceeding to
establish the status of a right of a ✓ Preterition – the total omission of
party, or a particular fact. In special a compulsory heir from the
proceedings, the remedy is granted inheritance. It consists in the
generally upon an application or silence of the testator with regard
motion. to a compulsory heir, omitting him
in the testament, either by not
( a petition for a declaration of a
mentioning him at all, or by not
status)
giving him anything in the
✓ Action – an act by which one hereditary property but without
sues another in a court of justice expressly disinheriting him, even if
for the enforcement or protection he is mentioned in the will in the
of a right, or the prevention or latter case.
redress of a wrong.
- It is a concept of
( a formal demand of a right by one testamentary succession and
against another) requires a will.

✓ Civil action – a party sues ✓ The applicability of the parol

another for the enforcement or evidence rule requires that the
protection of a right which the case be between parties and their
party claims he/she is entitled to. successors-in-interest.

✓ Where a party-litigant seeks to ✓ The objection against the

recover property from another, his admission of any evidence must be
remedy is to file an action. made at the proper time, as soon
as the ground therefor become
✓ Where his purpose is to seek the
reasonably apparent, and if not so
appointment of a guardian for an
made, it will be understood to have allegations of the plaintiffs
been waived. In the case of ownership of the contested lot prior
testimonial evidence, the objection to the issuance of such free patent
must be made when the and certificate of title as well as the
objectionable question is asked or defendant’s fraud or mistake; as
after the answer is given if the the case may be, in successfully
objectionable features become obtaining these documents of title
apparent only by reason of such over the parcel of land claimed by
answer. plaintiff. In such a case, the nullity
arises strictly not from the fraud or
✓ The hearsay evidence whether
deceit but from the fact that the
objected to or not cannot be given
land is beyond the jurisdiction of
credence for having no probative
the Bureau of Lands to bestow and
value. This principle, has been
whatever patent or certificate of
relaxed in cases where, in addition
title obtained therefor is
to the failure to object to the
consequently void ab initio. The
admissibility of the subject
real party in interest is xxx the
evidence, there were other pieces
plaintiff who alleges a pre-existing
of evidence presented or there
right of ownership over the parcel
were other circumstances
of land in question even before the
prevailing to support the fact in
grant of title to the defendant.
issue.
✓ With respect to the purported
✓ Hearsay evidence alone may be
cause of action for reconveyance, it
insufficient to establish a fact in an
is settled that in this kind of action
injunction suit but, when no
the free patent and the certificate
objection is made thereto, it is, like
of title are respected as
any other evidence, to be
incontrovertible. What is sought
considered and given importance it
instead is the transfer of the
deserves. (Top-Weld Manufacturing,
property, in this case the title
Inc. v. ECED S.A)
therefor, which has been wrongfully
7. MAYUGA v. ATIENZA or erroneously registered in the
defendant’s name.
✓ In an action of reversion, the
pertinent allegations in the ✓ All that must be alleged in the
complaint would admit State complaint are two facts which
ownership of the disputed land. admitting them to be true would
entitle the plaintiff to recover title
✓ A cause of action for declaration
to the disputed land, namely:
of nullity of free parent and
certificate of title would require
 1. That the plaintiff was the the will only upon a showing of
owner of the land credible evidence of fraud.
2. That the defendant had
✓ It is a settled doctrine that the
illegally dispossessed him of
omission of some relatives does not
the same.
affect the due execution of a will.
8. ABADA v. ABAJA
10. GUY v. CA
✓ An attestation clause is made for
✓ The right to accept an
the purpose of preserving, in
inheritance left tot the poor shall
permanent form, a record of the
belong to the persons designated
facts attending the execution of the
by the testator to determine the
will, so that in case of failure of the
beneficiaries and distribute the
memory of the subscribing
property, or in their default, to
witnesses, or other casualty, they
those mentioned in Article 1030.
may still be proved.
✓ Parents and guardians may not
✓ A will should not be rejected
therefore repudiate the inheritance
where its attestation clause serves
of their wards without judicial
the purpose of the law.
approval. This is because
✓ Substantial Compliance Rule – repudiation amounts to an
alienation of property which must
9. ORTEGA v. VALMONTE
pass the court’s scrutiny in order to
✓ Fraud – a trick, secret device, protect the interest of the ward.
false statement, or pretense, by
11. GUERRERO v. BIHIS
which the subject of it is cheated. It
may be of such character that the ✓ An acknowledgment taken
testator is misled or deceived as to outside the territorial limits of the
the nature or contents of the officer’s jurisdiction is void as if the
document which he executes, or it person taking it ware wholly
may relate to some extrinsic fact, without official character.
in consequence of the deception
12. YUSON v. ARCIAGA
regarding which the testator is led
to make a certain will which, but for ✓ A notarized Deed of Absolute
the fraud, he would not have made. Sale has in its favor the
presumption of regularity and it
✓ The party challenging the will
carries the evidentiary weight
bears the burden of proving the
conferred upon it with respect to its
existence of fraud at the time of its
execution.
execution. The burden to show
otherwise shifts to the proponent of 13. MENDOZA v. DE LOS SANTOS
✓ Reserva Troncal - a special rule fact which courts are permitted to
designed primarily to assure the draw from proof of other facts.
return of a reservable property to Presumptions are classified into
the third degree relatives belonging presumptions of law and
to the line from which the property presumptions of fact. Presumptions
originally came, and avoid its being of law are in turn, either conclusive
dissipated into and by the relatives or disputable.
of the inheriting ascendant.
✓ Conclusive presumptions –
✓ There are 3 lines of transmission inferences which the law makes so
in Reserva Troncal: peremptory that no contrary proof,
no matter how strong, may
1. By gratuitous title, whether
overturn them.
by inheritance or donation,
from an ✓ Disputable presumptions – can
ascendant/brother/sister to a be relied on only in the absence of
descendant called the sufficient evidence to the contrary.
prepositus. (one of which is the presumption of
2. By operation of law from the marriage)
prepositus to the other
✓ Adoption - a juridical act, a
ascendant or reservor, also
proceeding in rem, which created
called the reservista.
between two persons a relationship
3. From the reservista to the
similar to that which results from
reserves or reservatarios who
legitimate paternity and filiation.
must be relatives within the
third degree from which the ✓ Administrator – a person
property came. appointed by the court to
administer the intestate estate of
✓ The law does not go farther than
the decedent.
such ascendant/brother/sister in
determining the lineal character of 19. ARELLANO v. PASCUAL
the property.
✓ The term collation has two
17. INTESTATE ESTATE OF SUNTAY distinct concepts: first, it is a mere
mathematical operation by the
✓ The selection of an administrator
addition of the value of donations
lies in the sound discretion of the
made by the testator to the value
trial court.
of the hereditary estate; and
[Link] v. RUSTIA second, it is the return to the
hereditary estate of property
✓ Presumption – an inference of
disposed of by lucrative title by the
the existence or non-existence of a
testator during his lifetime.
✓ The purposes of collation are to spouse are concurring
secure equality among the compulsory heirs.
compulsory heirs in so far as is
20. AGRO v. BALANSAG
possible and to determine the free
portion, after finding the legitime, ✓ A certificate of title serves as
so that inofficious donations may evidence of an indefeasible title to
be reduced. the property in favor of the person
whose name appears therein. A
✓ Collation takes place when there
certificate of title accumulates in
are compulsory heirs, one of its
one document a precise and
purposes being to determine the
correct statement of the exact
legitime and the free portion. If
status of the fee held by its owner.
there is no compulsory heir, there
The certificate, in the absence of
is no legitime to be safeguarded.
fraud, is the evidence of title and
✓ The compulsory heirs may be shows exactly the real interest of
classified into: its owner.

1. Primary ✓ To successfully assail the juristic

2. Secondary value of what a Torrens title
3. Concurring establishes, a sufficient and
- The primary compulsory heirs convincing quantum of evidence on
are those who have the defect of the title must be
precedence over and exclude adduced to overcome the
other compulsory heirs; predisposition in law in favor of a
legitimate children and holder of a Torrens title.
descendants are primary
28. ANCHETA v. DALAYGON
compulsory heirs.
- The secondary compulsory ✓ A decree of distribution of the
heirs are those who succeed estate of a deceased person vests
only in the absence of the the title to the land of the estate in
primary heirs; the legitimate the distributes, which, if erroneous
parents and ascendants are may be corrected by a timely
secondary compulsory heirs. appeal. Once it becomes final, its
- The concurring compulsory binding effect is like any other
heirs are those who succeed judgment in rem. However, in
together with the primary or exceptional cases, a final decree of
the secondary compulsory distribution of the estate may be
heirs; the illegitimate set aside for lack of jurisdiction or
children, and the surviving fraud.
✓ An annulment of judgment filed have claims upon the testator, and
under B.P. 129 may be based on to comprehend the manner in
the ground that a judgment is void which the instrument will distribute
for want of jurisdiction or that the his property among the objects of
judgment was obtained by extrinsic his bounty.
fraud. For fraud to become basis
30. BAGTAS v. PAGUIO
for annulment of judgment, it has
to be extrinsic or actual, and must ✓ Contrary to the very prevalent
be brought within four years from lay impression, perfect soundness
the discovery of the fraud. of mind is not essential to
testamentary capacity. A testator
✓ That the prescriptive period for
may be afflicted with a variety of
annulment of judgment based on
mental weaknesses, disorders, or
extrinsic fraud commences to run
peculiarities and still be capable in
from the discovery of the fraud or
law of executing a valid will.
fraudulent act.
✓ To constitute a sound and
✓ Extrinsic Fraud - refers to any
disposing mind, it is not necessary
fraudulent act of the prevailing
that the mind shall be wholly
party in the litigation which is
unbroken, unimpaired, or
committed outside of the trial of
unshattered by disease or
the case, whereby the defeated
otherwise, or that the testator
party has been prevented from
should be in the full possession of
exhibiting fully his side of the case
his reasoning faculties.
by fraud or deception practiced on
him by his opponent. ✓ Neither age, nor sickness, nor
extreme distress, nor debility of
✓ The overriding consideration
body will affect the capacity to
when extrinsic fraud is alleged is
make a will, if sufficient intelligence
that the fraudulent scheme of the
remains. The failure of memory is
prevailing litigant prevented a
not sufficient to create the
party from having his day in court.
incapacity, unless it be total, or
29. BUGNAO v. UBAG extend to his immediate family or
property.
✓ Testamentary Capacity – the
capacity to comprehend the nature 31. NEYRA v. NEYRA
of the transaction which the
32. BALTAZAR v. LAXA
testator is engaged at the time, to
recollect the property to be ✓ Forgetfulness is not equivalent to
disposed of and the person who being of unsound mind.
would naturally be supposed to
✓ It shall be sufficient if the involves a mental act, there would
testator was able at the time of be no means, therefore, of
making the will to know the nature ascertaining by a physical
of the estate to be disposed of, the examination of the will whether the
proper objects of his bounty, and witnesses had indeed signed in the
the character of the testamentary presence of the testator and of
act each other unless this is
substantially expressed in the
39. CANEDA v. CA
attestation.
✓ The purpose of the law in
40. VALMONTE v. ORTEGA
requiring the clause to state the
number of pages on which the will ✓ Fraud – a trick, secret device,
is written is to safeguard against false statement, or pretense, by
possible interpolation or omission which the subject of it is cheated.
of one or some of its pages and to
✓ It is settled doctrine that the
prevent any increase or decrease in
omission of some relatives does not
the pages, whereas the
affect the due execution of a will.
subscription of the signature of the
testator and the attesting 49. DE MOLO v. MOLO
witnesses is made for the purpose
✓ A subsequent will, containing a
of authentication and identification,
clause revoking a previous will,
and thus indicates that the will is
having been disallowed for the
the very same instrument executed
reason that it was not executed in
by the testator and attested to by
conformity with the provisions of
the witnesses.
section 618 of the Code of Civil
✓ Attestation – consists in Procedure as to the making of wills,
witnessing the testator’s execution cannot produce the effect of
of the will in order to see and take annulling the previous will,
not mentally that those things are inasmuch as said revocatory clause
done which the statute requires for is void.
the execution of a will and that the
✓ It is universally agreed that
signature of the testator exists as a
where the second will is invalid on
fact.
account of not being executed in
✓ Subscription – signing of the accordance with the provisions of
signing of the witnesses’ names the stature, or where the testator
upon the same paper for the who has not sufficient mental
purpose of identification of such capacity to make a will or the will is
paper as the will which was procured through undue influence,
executed by the testator. As it or the such, in other words, where
the second will is really no will, it fails and the original will
does not revoke the first will or remains in full force.
affect it in any matter. - The failure of a new
testamentary disposition
✓ DEPENDENT RELATIVE
upon whose validity the
REVOCATION
revocation depends, is
- Is usually applied where the equivalent to the non-
testator cancels or destroys a fulfillment of a suspensive
will or executes an conditions, and hence
instrument intended to prevents the revocation of
revoke a will with a present the original will. But a mere
intention to make a new intent to make at some time
testamentary disposition as a a will in the place of that
substitute for the old, and the destroyed will not render the
new disposition is not made destruction conditional. It
or, if made, fails of effect for must appear that the
same reason. revocation is dependent upon
- Is limited to the existence of the valid execution of a new
some other document, will.
however, and has been
applied where a will was
destroyed as a consequence
of a mistake of law.
- Is established that where the
act of destruction is
connected with the making of
another will so as fairly to
raise the inference that the
testator meant the
revocation of the old to
depend upon the efficacy of a
new disposition intended to
be substituted, the
revocation will be conditional
and dependent upon the
efficacy of the new
disposition; and if, for any
reason, the new will intended
to be made as a substitute is
inoperative, the revocation