Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ISSUE:
Whether or not, based on the evidence submitted, respondent appellate
court erred in concluding that both decedents Last Will and Testament,
and its Codicil were subscribed by the instrumental witnesses on
separate occasions.
HELD:
Evidence may generally be classified into three (3) kinds, from which a
court or tribunal may properly acquire knowledge for making its decision,
namely: real evidence or autoptic preference, testimonial evidence and
circumstantial evidence.
In the case at bench, the autoptic proference contradicts the testimonial
evidence produced by petitioner. Thus, it was not erroneous nor
baseless for respondent court to disbelieve petitioners claim that both
testamentary documents in question were subscribed to in accordance
with the provisions of Art. 805 of the Civil Code. Neither did respondent
court err when it did not accord great weight to the testimony of Judge
Tomas A. Tolete since nowhere in Judge Toletes testimony is there any
kind of explanation for the different-colored signatures on the
testaments. The petition for review is denied. The Supreme Court
affirmed in toto the Decicion of the Court of Appeals.
!
!
source:http://rsb-evidence.blogspot.com/2015/02/juvys-digest.html