Scribd
Upload
428 views

Rivera vs. IAC

A prominent man named Venancio Rivera died. Jose Rivera claimed to be Venancio's son and heir, but Adelaido Rivera contested this and presented two holographic wills naming himself and his siblings as heirs. Jose challenged the wills' authenticity. The court found Jose was not actually Venancio's son. As a stranger to the estate, Jose did not have standing to contest the wills, and the testimony of two of Venancio's children authenticating the wills was sufficient according to the law on probating holographic wills. The appellate court upheld the wills' validity since they were in Venancio's handwriting as required.

Uploaded by

Claudine Golangco
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
428 views

Rivera vs. IAC

A prominent man named Venancio Rivera died. Jose Rivera claimed to be Venancio's son and heir, but Adelaido Rivera contested this and presented two holographic wills naming himself and his siblings as heirs. Jose challenged the wills' authenticity. The court found Jose was not actually Venancio's son. As a stranger to the estate, Jose did not have standing to contest the wills, and the testimony of two of Venancio's children authenticating the wills was sufficient according to the law on probating holographic wills. The appellate court upheld the wills' validity since they were in Venancio's handwriting as required.

Uploaded by

Claudine Golangco
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

RIVERA v.

INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT


G.R. Nos. 75005-06 15 February 1990
Cruz, J.

DOCTRINE:

In the probate of a holographic will, it shall be necessary that at least one witness who
knows the handwriting and signature of the testator explicitly declare that the will and
the signature are in the handwriting of the testator. If the will is contested, at least three
of such witnesses shall be required
FACTS:
A prominent and wealthy resident of that town named Venancio Rivera died. Jose Rivera,
claiming to be the only surviving legitimate son of the deceased, filed a petition for the
issuance of letters of administration over Venancio's estate which was opposed by
Adelaido J. Rivera, who denied that Jose was the son of the decedent. Adelaido averred
that Venancio was his father and did not die intestate but in fact left two holographic wills
which was eventually admitted to probate. Zenaida and Venancio Rivera, Jr., siblings of
Adelaido, authenticated the wills as having been written and signed by their father. The
existence and also the authenticity of the holographic wills were questioned by Jose
Rivera. In his own petition, he declared that Venancio Rivera died intestate; he also
denied the existence of the holographic wills presented by Adelaido Rivera for probate. In
both proceedings, Jose Rivera opposed the holographic wills submitted by Adelaido
Rivera and claimed that they were spurious. After joint trial, it was found that Jose Rivera
was not the son of the decedent but of a different Venancio Rivera who was married to
Maria VITAL. The Venancio Rivera whose estate was in question was married to Maria
JOCSON, by whom he had seven children, including Adelaido.
ISSUE:
Can Jose Rivera contest the validity of the supposed holographic wills of Venancio Rivera?
HELD:
NO. Jose Rivera is not the son of the deceased Venancio Rivera whose estate is in question.
Hence, being a mere stranger, he had no personality to contest the wills and his
opposition thereto did not have the legal effect of requiring the three witnesses. The
testimony of Zenaida and Venancio Rivera, Jr., who authenticated the wills as having been
written and signed by their father, was sufficient. In the probate of a holographic will, it
shall be necessary that at least one witness who knows the handwriting and signature of
the testator explicitly declare that the will and the signature are in the handwriting of the
testator. If the will is contested, at least three of such witnesses shall be required. The
respondent court considered the holographic wills valid because it found them to have
been written, dated and signed by the testator himself in accordance with Article 810 of
the Civil Code. It also held there was no necessity of presenting the three witnesses
required under Article 811 because the authenticity of the wills had not been questioned.

You might also like