Aznar v Garcia 7 scra 95 Facts: Edward S.

Christensen, though born in New York, migrated to California where he resided and consequently was considered a California Citizen for a period of nine years to 1913. He came to the Philippines where he became a domiciliary until the time of his death. However, during the entire period of his residence in this country, he had always considered himself as a citizen of California. In his will, executed on March 5, 1951, he instituted an acknowledged natural daughter, Maria Lucy Christensen as his only heir but left a legacy of some money in favor of Helen Christensen Garcia who, in a decision rendered by the Supreme Court had been declared as an acknowledged natural daughter of his. Counsel of Helen claims that under Art. 16 (2) of the civil code, California law should be applied, the matter is returned back to the law of domicile, that Philippine law is ultimately applicable, that the share of Helen must be increased in view of successional rights of illegitimate children under Philippine laws. On the other hand, counsel for daughter Maria , in as much that it is clear under Art, 16 (2) of the Mew Civil Code, the national of the deceased must apply, our courts must apply internal law of California on the matter. Under California law, there are no compulsory heirs and consequently a testator should dispose any property possessed by him in absolute dominion.

Issue: Whether Philippine Law or California Law should apply.

Held: The Supreme Court deciding to grant more successional rights to Helen Christensen Garcia said in effect that there be two rules in California on the matter. The conflict rule which should apply to Californians outside the Californ ia, and The internal Law which should apply to California domiciles in califronia. The California conflict rule, found on Art. 946 of the California Civil code States that if there is no law to the contrary in the place where personal property is situated, it is deemed to follow the decree of its owner and is governed by the law of the domicile. Christensen being domiciled outside california, the law of his domicile, the Philippines is ought to be followed. Wherefore, the decision appealed is reversed and case is remanded to the lower court with instructions that partition be made as that of the Philippine law provides.

BUGNAO vs. UBAG (29) 14 Phil 163 (1909) Testamentary Capacity; Degree of Mental Capacity FACTS: Catalino Bugnao, widow of Domingo Ubag, presented for probate her late husbands purported last will and testament wherein she was named sole beneficiary, it appearing that he left no heirs in the direct ascending or ascending line. This document was contested by the decedents brothers and sisters, who contended that he did not leave a will since: - at the time the will was allegedly executed, their brother was not of sound mind and memory, and was physically and mentally incapable of making a will (he was suffering from an advanced stage of tuberculosis complicated with severe intermittent attacks of asthma) - the subscribing witnesses were not present and before each other when the decedent signed the will, pointing out minor inconsistencies in a particular incident and claiming that they (brothers and sisters) were at their brothers house when the purported will was allegedly signed - the fact that the alleged will leaves all the property of the testator to his widow, and wholly fails to make any provision for his brothers or sisters, indicates a lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence The lower court admitted the will to probate. ISSUE: Whether or not decedents physical condition and manner of disposition indicates his incapacity to make a will RULING: Testamentary capacity is the capacity to comprehend the nature of the transaction which the testator is engaged at the time, to recollect the property to be disposed of and the person who would naturally be supposed to have claims upon the testator, and to comprehend the manner in which the instrument will distribute his property among the objects of his bounty. Sound mind does not mean a perfectly balanced mind. The question of soundness is one of degree. Between the highest degree of soundness of mind and memory which unquestionably carries with it full testamentary capacity, and that degree of mental aberration generally known as insanity or idiocy, there are numberless degrees of mental capacity or incapacity, and while on one hand it has been held that "mere weakness of mind, or partial imbecility from the disease of body, or from age, will not render a person incapable of making a will, a weak or feeble minded person may make a valid will, provided he has understanding memory sufficient to enable him to know what he is about, and how or to whom he is disposing of his property. All the evidence of physical weakness in no wise establishes his mental incapacity or a lack of testamentary capacity, and indeed the evidence of the subscribing witnesses as to the aid furnished them by the testator in preparing the will, and his clear recollection of the boundaries and physical description of the various parcels of land set out therein, taken together with the fact that he was able to give to the person who wrote the will clear and explicit instructions as to his desires touching the disposition of his property, is strong evidence of his testamentary capacity. That it is inherently

improbable that a man would make so unnatural and unreasonable a will by no means tends to disclose either an unsound mind or the presence of undue influence on the part of his wife, or in any wise corroborates contestants' allegation that the will never was executed.
BAGTAS VS. PAGUIO 22 Phil 227

FACTS: 1. Pioquinto Paguio died on September 28, 1909. 2. For some 14 or 15 years prior to the time of his death, he suffered from a paralysis of the left side of his body; that a few years prior to his death his hearing became impaired and that he lost the power of speech. 3. He retained the use of his right hand and was able to write fairly well. 4. Through the medium of signs he was able to indicate his wishes to his wife and to other members of his family. 5. The testator wrote out on several pieces of paper the disposition of his property. 6. The same was in turn delivered to one Seor Marco who transcribed and put them in form. 7. The pieces of paper were then delivered to a lawyer who read them to the testator asking if they were his dispositions. 8. The testator assented each time with an affirmative movement of his head. 9. The widow of the decedent Juliana Bagtas then sought the probate of the purported last will and testament of Pioquinto. 10. The CFI of Bataan admitted the same for probate. 11. Isidoro Paguio, a son of the decedent by a former marriage, opposed the probation on the ground that the testator was not n full enjoyment and use of his mental faculties and was without mental capacity necessary to execute a valid will. ISSUE: Was the will was validly executed? HELD: The rule of law relating to the presumption of mental soundness is well-established, and the testator in the case at bar never having been adjudged insane by the court of competent jurisdiction , this presumption continues, and it is therefore incumbent upon the opponents to overcome this legal presumption by proper evidence. The opponents failed to do this. The courts have repeatedly held that mere weakness of mind and body , induced by age and disease does not render a person incapable of making a will. The law does not require that a person shall continue in the full enjoyment and use of his pristine physical and mental powers in order to execute a valid will. If such were the legal standard , few indeed would be the number of wills that could meet such exacting requirements. The authorities, both medical and legal, are universal in the statement that the question of mental capacity is one of degree, and that there are many gradations from the highest degree of mental soundness to the lowest conditions of diseased mentality which are denominated insanity or idiocy.