G.R. No.

L-5826

April 29, 1953

Testate estate of the late VICENTE CAGRO. JESUSA CAGRO, petitioner-appellee,

vs.
PELAGIO CAGRO, ET AL., oppositors-appellants.
Clouduallo Lucero and Vicente C. Santos for appellants.
Marciano Chitongco and Zosimo B. Echanova for appellee.
PARAS, C.J.:
This is an appeal interposed by the oppositors from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Samar, admitting
to probate the will allegedly executed by Vicente Cagro who died in Laoangan, Pambujan, Samar, on
February 14, 1949.
The main objection insisted upon by the appellant in that the will is fatally defective, because its attestation
clause is not signed by the attesting witnesses. There is no question that the signatures of the three witnesses to
the will do not appear at the bottom of the attestation clause, although the page containing the same is
signed by the witnesses on the left-hand margin.
We are of the opinion that the position taken by the appellant is correct. The attestation clause is 'a
memorandum of the facts attending the execution of the will' required by law to be made by the attesting
witnesses, and it must necessarily bear their signatures. An unsigned attestation clause cannot be considered
as an act of the witnesses, since the omission of their signatures at the bottom thereof negatives their
participation.
The petitioner and appellee contends that signatures of the three witnesses on the left-hand margin conform
substantially to the law and may be deemed as their signatures to the attestation clause. This is untenable,
because said signatures are in compliance with the legal mandate that the will be signed on the left-hand
margin of all its pages. If an attestation clause not signed by the three witnesses at the bottom thereof, be
admitted as sufficient, it would be easy to add such clause to a will on a subsequent occasion and in the
absence of the testator and any or all of the witnesses.
Wherefore, the appealed decision is reversed and the probate of the will in question denied. So ordered with
costs against the petitioner and appellee.
Pablo, Bengzon, Montemayor, Jugo and Labrador, JJ., concur.
Separate Opinions
BAUTISTA ANGELO, J., dissenting:
I dissent. In my opinion the will in question has substantially complied with the formalities of the law and,
therefore, should be admitted to probate . It appears that the will was signed by the testator and was attested
by three instrumental witnesses, not only at the bottom, but also on the left-hand margin. The witnesses testified
not only that the will was signed by the testator in their presence and in the presence of each other but also
that when they did so, the attestation clause was already written thereon. Their testimony has not been
contradicted. The only objection set up by the oppositors to the validity of the will is the fact that the signatures
of the instrumental witnesses do not appear immediately after the attestation clause.
This objection is too technical to be entertained. In the case of Abangan vs. Abangan, (40 Phil., 476), this court
said that when the testamentary dispositions "are wholly written on only one sheet signed at the bottom by the
testator and three witnesses (as the instant case),their signatures on the left margin of said sheet would be
completely purposeless." In such a case, the court said, the requirement of the signatures on the left hand
margin was not necessary because the purpose of the law which is to avoid the substitution of any of the
sheets of the will, thereby changing the testator's dispositions has already been accomplished. We may say

the same thing in connection with the will under consideration because while the three instrumental witnesses
did not sign immediately by the majority that it may have been only added on a subsequent occasion and not
at the uncontradicted testimony of said witnesses to the effect that such attestation clause was already written
in the will when the same was signed.
The following observation made by this court in the Abangan case is very fitting:
The object of the solemnities surrounding the execution of wills is to close the door against bad faith and
fraud to avoid substitution of wills and testaments and to guaranty their truth and authenticity. Therefore
the laws on this subject should be interpreted in such a way as to attain these primordial ends. But, on
the other hand, also one must not lose sight of the fact that it i not the object of the law to restrain and
curtail the exercise of the right to make a will. So when an interpretation already given assures such
ends, any other interpretation already given assures such ends, any other interpretation whatsoever,
that adds nothing but demands more requisites entirely unnecessary useless and frustrative of the
testator's last will, must be disregarded. (supra)
We should not also overlook the liberal trend of the New Civil Code in the matter of interpretation of wills, the
purpose of which, in case of doubt, is to give such interpretation that would have the effect of preventing
intestacy (article 788 and 791, New Civil Code)
I am therefore of the opinion that the will in question should be admitted to probate.
Feria, J., concurs.
TUASON, J., dissenting:
I cuncur in Mr. Justice Bautista's dissenting opinion and may add that the majority decision erroneously sets
down as a fact that the attestation clause was no signed when the witnesses signatures appear on the left
margin and the real and only question is whether such signatures are legally sufficient.
The only answers, in our humble opinion, is yes. The law on wills does not provide that the attesting witness
should sign the clause at the bottom. In the absence of such provision, there is no reason why signatures on the
margin are not good. A letter is not any the less the writter's simply because it was signed, not at the
conventional place but on the side or on top.
Testate of Vicente Cagro. Jesusa Cagro (appellee) vPelagio Cagro, et al.,1953 | Paras, C.J.
Appellants opposes the decision of the CFI of Samar admitting to probate the will allegedly executed
byVicente Cargo, now deceased.They contend the will as defective because itsattestation clause is not signed
by the attesting witnesses,although their signatures are found on the left-handmargin of the same page of such
clause.
W/N the will is fatally defective for not having thesignatures of the witnesses below the attestationclause.
Yes.Held and Ratio:
The attestation clause is a memorandum of the factsattending the execution of the will required by law to be
made by the attesting witnesses, and it must necessarilybear their signatures.
-An unsigned attestation clause cannot beconsidered as an act of the witnesses, since theomission of their
signatures at the bottom thereof negatives their participation.Signatures of the the three witnesses on the lefthandmargin DO NOT conform substantially to the law andCANNOT be deemed as their signatures to the
attestationclause (as appellee contends otherwise).
-SC says such signatures are in compliance withthe legal mandate that the will be signed on theleft-hand
margin of all its pages;
-If an attestation clause not signed by the threewitnesses at the bottom thereof, be admitted, itwould be easy
to add such clause to a will on asubsequent occasion and in the absence of thetestator and any or all of the
witnesses.REVERSED.Bautista Angelo, J. Dissenting.The Justice believes the will substantiallycomplied with the
formalities of the law and thereforeshould be admitted.
-It appears the will was signed by the testator andwas attested by three instrumental witnesses, notonly at the
bottom, but also on the left-handmargin;

-The three witnesses TESTIFED not only that thewill was signed by the testator in their presenceand in the
presence of each other but also whenthey did so, the attestation, the attestation clausewas already written
thereon; their testimony hasnot been contracted;
-The only objection of the oppositors is the factthat the signatures of the witnesses do notappear immediately
after the attestation clause;The objection is too technical to be entertained;
-In Abangan v Abangan, when the testamentarydispositions are wholly written on only one sheetsigned at the
bottom by the testator and threewitness (as in the instant case), their signatureson the left margin of said sheet
would becompletely purposeless;
-Such signatures were not necessary since thepurpose of the lawto avoid the substitution of any of the sheets
of the will, thereby changing the testators dispositions has already beenaccomplished;
-Above case cited again: the object of thesolemnities surround the execution of wills is toclose the door against
bad faith and fraud toavoid substitution of wills and testaments and toguaranty their truth and authenticity;
laws on thismatter should be interpreted in such a way as toattain these primordial ends; but one must
notforget that it is not object of the law to restrainand curtail the exercise of the right to make awill; any other
interpretation whatsoever, thatadds nothing but demands more requisitesentirely unnecessary useless and
frustative of the testators last will, must be disregarded;
-Lastly, she says that we should not overlook theliberal trend of the NCC in the matter of interpretation of wills,
the purpose of which, incase of doubt, is to give such interpretation thatwould have the effect of preventing
intestacy.(788 and 791, NCC).Tuason, J. Dissenting:The signatures are legally sufficient. The law onwills does not
provide that the attesting witness shouldsign the clause at the bottom. In the absence of suchprovision, there is
no reason why signatures on themargin are not good. A letter is not any the less thewritter's simply because it
was signed, not at theconventional place but on the side or on top
Testate Estate of Cagro vs. Cagro
G.R. L-5826
Facts:
1. The case is an appeal interposed by the oppositors from a decision of the CFI of Samar which admitted to
probate a will allegedly executed by Vicente Cagro who died in Pambujan, Samar on Feb. 14, 1949.
2. The appellants insisted that the will is defective because the attestation was not signed by the witnesses at
the bottom although the page containing the same was signed by the witnesses on the left hand margin.
3. Petitioner contended that the signatures of the 3 witnesses on the left hand margin conform substantially to
law and may be deemed as their signatures to the attestation clause.
Issue: Whether or not the will is valid
HELD: Will is not valid. The attestation clause is a memorandum of the facts attending the execution of the will. It
is required by law to be made by the attesting witnesses and it must necessarily bear their signatures.
An unsigned attestation clause cannot be considered as an act of the witnesses since the omission of their
signatures at the bottom negatives their participation.
Moreover, the signatures affixed on the let hand margin is not substantial conformance to the law. The said
signatures were merely in conformance with the requirement that the will must be signed on the left-hand
margin of all its pages. If the attestation clause is unsigned by the 3 witnesses at the bottom, it would be easier
to add clauses to a will on a subsequent occasion and in the absence of the testator and any or all of the
witnesses.
The probate of the will is denied.
Cagro v. Cagro
92:1032 | Dina
FACTS:

Vicente Cagro died on Feb. 14, 1949 in Samar. Since the decedent allegedly made a will prior to his
death, the will was probated before the CFI of Samar. However, the oppositors-appellant objected the
probate proceeding alleging that the will is fatally defective because its attestation clause is not signed by the
attesting witnesses. It is undisputed that the signatures of the three witnesses to the will do not appear at the
bottom of the attestation clause, although the page containing the same is signed by the witnesses on the lefthand margin.
ISSUE:
W/N the will may be probated even if the signatures of the witnesses do not appear at the bottom of the
attestation clause, and instead, they were placed on the left-hand margin of the page containing the same.
HELD:
No. The position taken by the oppositor-appellant is correct. The attestation clause is 'a memorandum of
the facts attending the execution of the will' required by law to be made by the attesting witnesses, and it must
necessarily bear their signatures. An unsigned attestation clause cannot be considered as an act of the
witnesses, since the omission of their signatures at the bottom thereof negatives their participation.
The petitioner-appellee contends that signatures of the three witnesses on the left-hand margin
conform substantially to the law and may be deemed as their signatures to the attestation clause. This is
untenable, because said signatures are in compliance with the legal mandate that the will be signed on the
left-hand margin of all its pages. If an attestation clause not signed by the three witnesses at the bottom
thereof, be admitted as sufficient, it would be easy to add such clause to a will on a subsequent occasion and
in the absence of the testator and any or all of the witnesses.
Bautista Angelo, J. dissenting:
I dissent. In my opinion the will in question has substantially complied with the formalities of the law and,
therefore, should be admitted to probate. It appears that the will was signed by the testator and was attested
by three instrumental witnesses, not only at the bottom, but also on the left-hand margin. The witnesses testified
not only that the will was signed by the testator in their presence and in the presence of each other but also
that when they did so, the attestation clause was already written thereon. Their testimony has not been
contradicted. The only objection set up by the oppositors to the validity of the will is the fact that the signatures
of the instrumental witnesses do not appear immediately after the attestation clause.
This objection is too technical to be entertained. In the case of Abangan vs. Abangan, (40 Phil. 476), this
court said that when the testamentary dispositions "are wholly written on only one sheet signed at the bottom
by the testator and three witnesses (as the instant case),their signatures on the left margin of said sheet would
be completely purposeless." In such a case, the court said, the requirement of the signatures on the left hand
margin was not necessary because the purpose of the law which is to avoid the substitution of any of the
sheets of the will, thereby changing the testator's dispositions has already been accomplished. We may say
the same thing in connection with the will under consideration because while the three instrumental witnesses
did not sign immediately by the majority that it may have been only added on a subsequent occasion and not
at the uncontradicted testimony of said witnesses to the effect that such attestation clause was already written
in the will when the same was signed.
TUASON, J., dissenting:
I concur in Mr. Justice Bautista's dissenting opinion and may add that the majority decision erroneously
sets down as a fact that the attestation clause was not signed when the witnesses signatures appear on the
left margin and the real and only question is whether such signatures are legally sufficient. The law on wills does
not provide that the attesting witness should sign the clause at the bottom. In the absence of such provision,
there is no reason why the signatures on the margin are not acceptable