G.R. No.

L-21151 February 25, 1924

In re will of Antonio Vergel de Dios, deceased.

RAMON J. FERNANDEZ, petitioner-appellant,

HERMELO VERGEL DE DIOS and SEVERINA JAVIER, legatees-appellants,

vs.

FERNANDO VERGEL DE DIOS ET AL opponents-appellees.

ROMUALDEZ, J.:

FACTS:

IN RE WILL OF ANTONIO VERGEL DE DIOS, RAMON J. FERNANDEZ vs. HERMELO VERGEL, et al.

No. L-2115, February 25, 1924

Facts

The question in this case is as to the validity of the will of the late Antonio Vergel de Dios, which

was propounded by Ramon Fernandez for probate, and contested by Fernando Vergel de Dios and

Francisco, Ricardo and VirgilioRustia, alleging that the attestation clause was fatally defective since the

witnesses did not sign the attestation clause in the presence of the testator and of one another.

The defects attributed to the will by the contestants are as follows, to wit:

(a) It was not sufficiently proven that the testator knew the contents of the will.

(b) The testator did not sign all the pages of the will.

(c) He did not request anybody to attest the document as his last will.

(d) He did not sign it in the presence of any witness.

(e) The witnesses did not sign it in the presence of the testator, or of each other, nor with knowledge on
the part of the testator that they were signing his will.

(f ) The witnesses did not sign the attestation clause before the death of the testator.

(g) This clause was written after the execution of the dispositive part of the will and was attached to the
will after the death of the testator.

(h) The signatures of the testator on page 3 of Exhibit A are not authentic.
As to the numbering of the sheet containing the attestation clause, it is true that it does not appear on
the upper part of the sheet, but it does not appear in its text, the pertinent part of which is copied
hereinafter, with the words, having reference to the number of sheets of the will, underscored,
including the page number of the attestation:

Issue

Whether or not the signatures of the testator and the paging of the will are also necessary in the

attestation clause

Ruling

The attestation clause shall state the number of sheets or pages used, upon which the will is

written, and the fact that the testator signed the will and every page thereof, or caused some other

person to write his name, under his express direction, in the presence of three witnesses, and the latter

witnessed and signed the will and all pages thereof in the presence of the testator and of each other.

This refers to the contents of the text of the attestation, not the requirement or signatures

thereof outside of its text. It does not require that the attestation clause be signed by the testator or

that the page or sheet containing it be numbered.

In the case at bar the attestation clause in question states that the requirements prescribed for

the will were complied with, and this is enough for it, as such attestation clause, to be held as meeting

the requirements prescribed by the law for it.

The fact that in said clause the signature of the testator does not appear does not affect its

validity, for, as above-stated, the law does not require that it be signed by the testator.

Furthermore, although the numbering of the sheet containing the attestation clause does not

appear in the upper part thereof, yet if that numbering is found in its text, as when it is said therein that

the will consists of three sheets actually uses, correlatively numbered, besides this one, that is to say,

the sheet containing the attestation clause, the requirement prescribed by the law is substantially

complied with, for if the will consists of three sheets besides the one containing the attestation clause, it

is evident that the latter is the fourth page is to say, that the document consists of four sheets.

Concerning the absolute absence of the signature of the testator from the sheet containing the
attestation clause, this point was already decided in the above cited case of Abangan vs. Abangan,
where this court held that:
The testator's signature is not necessary in the attestation clause because this, as its name implies,
appertains only to the witnesses and not to the testator.

Separate Opinions

OSTRAND, J., dissenting:

I dissent and think that the judgment appealed from should have been affirmed. In my opinion, the
decision of the Court affords a striking illustration of the old adage that "a hard case makes bad law."