DAMASO T. AMBRAY AND CEFERINO T. AMBRAY, JR.

,
v. SYLVIA A. TSOUROUS, CARMENCITA AMBRAY-LAUREL et al
G.R. No. 209264, July 05, 2016
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal

Testimony or Deposition at Former Proceeding

QUESTION:

Spouses X and Y own a parcel of land described as Lot 2. The land was assigned to one of their heir,
Z. Spouses died. Z sold the land with the consent of X and was issued with Deed of Absolute Sale. B
and the other heirs raised that the Deed of Sale were null and void because the signatures of spouses X
and Y thereon were forgeries. Should the deed of sale be nullified?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
NO.
Section 47. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding. - The testimony or deposition of a
witness deceased or unable to testify, given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative,
involving the same parties and subject matter, may be given in evidence against the adverse party who
had the opportunity to cross-examine him.
Case law holds that for the said rule to apply, the following requisites must be satisfied: ( a) the
witness is dead or unable to testify; (b) his testimony or deposition was given in a former case or
proceeding, judicial or administrative, between the same parties or those representing the same
interests; (c) the former case involved the same subject as that in the present case, although on
different causes of action; (d) the issue testified to by the witness in the former trial is the same issue
involved in the present case and (e) the adverse party had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness
in the former case.

CHINA BANKING CORPORATION, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS

G.R. NO. 155299 : July 24, 2007
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal

Opinion Rule

QUESTION

X was a registered owner of parcels of land. X was blind. Y, obtained a loan from ABC Bank which
he made X as a surety that mortgaged her properties. Y failed to pay the loan, hence the properties of
X were foreclosed. Did X sign the real estate mortgage and surety agreement knowingly and
voluntarily, with full knowledge of its contents?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
NO.
The rule of evidence requiring the opinion of expert witnesses applies only to such matters clearly
within the domain of medical science, and not to matters that are within the common knowledge of
mankind which may be testified to by anyone familiar with the facts.
It is therefore clear that X was in fact blind, that she did not know the contents of the documents she
signed, and more importantly, that she did not know the capacity in which she was signing these
documents.

JOEY P. MARQUEZ vs. THE SANDIGANBAYAN 5th DIVISION

G.R. Nos. 187912-14 : January 31, 2011
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal
Opinion Rule
QUESTION

During an audit, several anomalies were discovered involving X, then City Mayor and Chairman of
the Bids and Awards; and Y, Head of the General Services Office. It was found that, X and Y secured
the procurement of several thousand rounds of bullets of different calibers. X denied that his
signatures on the disbursement vouchers, purchase requests and authorization requests were his. Is
X’s signature genuine?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

YES.

Section 22. How genuineness of handwriting proved. — The handwriting of a person may be proved
by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he has seen the person
write, or has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged, and
has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person. Evidence respecting the handwriting
may also be given by a comparison, made by the witness or the court, with writings admitted or
treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the
satisfaction of the judge.

While it is true that the appreciation of whether the signatures of X are genuine or not is subject to the
discretion of the graft court, this discretion, by the very nature of things, may rightly be exercised only
after the evidence is submitted to the court at the hearing. Evidence cannot properly be weighed if not
exhibited or produced before the court. Only after evidence is offered and admitted that the court can
appreciate and evaluate it. The prosecution had already offered its evidence on the matter. The court
should not deny the same right to the defense.

MA. SOCORRO CAMACHO-REYES vs. RAMON REYES

G.R. No. 185286 : August 18, 2010
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal
Opinion Rule
QUESTION

A petition for the declaration of nullity of marriage was filed by X against Y for psychological
incapacity to fulfil the essential marital obligations under Article 36 of the Family Code. Is the
testimony of an expert tenable?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
YES.

The probative force of the testimony of an expert does not lie in a mere statement of his theory or
opinion, but rather in the assistance that he can render to the courts in showing the facts that serve as a
basis for his criterion and the reasons upon which the logic of his conclusion is founded.

The lack of personal examination and interview of the respondent, or any other person diagnosed with
personality disorder, does not per se invalidate the testimonies of the doctors. Neither do their
findings automatically constitute hearsay that would result in their exclusion as evidence. In the
instant case, respondent’s pattern of behaviour manifests an inability, a psychological incapacity to
perform the essential marital obligations as shown by his: (1) sporadic financial support; (2) extra-
marital affairs; (3) substance abuse; (4) failed business attempts; (5) unpaid money obligations; (6)
inability to keep a job that is not connected with the family businesses; and (7) criminal charges of
estafa.

PETITION FOR THE WRIT OF AMPARO AND THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA IN FAVOR
OF MELISSA C. ROXAS vs. GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, GILBERT TEODORO
G.R. No. 189155  : September 7, 2010
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal

Opinion Rule
QUESTION

X an American citizen of Filipino descent enrolled in an exposure program to the Philippines.

Suddenly, fifteen (15) heavily armed men tortured her. At this juncture, X saw the other armed men
herding A and B, already blindfolded and taped at their mouths, to a nearby blue van. X impleaded
public officials occupying the uppermost echelons of the military and police hierarchy as respondents,
on the belief that it was government agents who were behind her abduction and torture. Is the
evidence president sufficient to pinpoint the involvement of the government?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

NO.

In amparo proceedings, the weight that may be accorded to parallel circumstances as evidence of
military involvement depends largely on the availability or non-availability of other pieces of
evidence that has the potential of directly proving the identity and affiliation of the perpetrators.
Direct evidence of identity, when obtainable, must be preferred over mere circumstantial evidence
based on patterns and similarity, because the former indubitably offers greater certainty as to the true
identity and affiliation of the perpetrators. An amparo court cannot simply leave to remote and hazy
inference what it could otherwise clearly and directly ascertain.

We opine that insofar as the present case is concerned, the perceived similarity cannot stand as
substantial evidence of the involvement of the government.

LUISA NAVARRO MARCOS vs. HEIRS OF DR. ANDRES NAVARRO, JR.

G.R. No. 198240 : July 3, 2013
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal
Opinion Rule
QUESTION

Spouses X and Y left parcels of land for their two daughters, A and B and their son C who also had
his own heirs. The heirs of their son is claiming ownership over the properties basing on a
handwritten affidavit issued by X transferring the properties to C. Is the handwritten affidavit valid?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
NO.

SEC. 49. Opinion of expert witness – The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special
knowledge, skill, experience or training which he is shown to possess, may be received in evidence.

The use of the word "may" in Section 49, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence signifies that the use of
opinion of an expert witness is permissive and not mandatory on the part of the courts. Jurisprudence
is also replete with instances wherein this Court dispensed with the testimony of expert witnesses to
prove forgeries. However, we have also recognized that handwriting experts are often offered as
expert witnesses considering the technical nature of the procedure in examining forged documents.
More important, analysis of the questioned signature in the deed of donation executed by the late
Andres Navarro, Sr. in crucial to the resolution of the case.

ADELFA DIO TOLENTINO AND HEIRS OF ROBERTO DIO v. SPOUSES MARIA

JERERA
G.R. No. 179874, June 22, 2015
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal

Opinion Rule
QUESTION

A, B, C and D ceded and conveyed by way of sale the subject property with right to repurchase to X.
For failure of the vendees to repurchase, X consolidated his absolute ownership over the property.
Yet, A executed a Deed of Absolute Sale of the subject property in favor of Y. X filed for quieting of
title, recovery of property and damages claim that since the sale was simulated and/or fictitious for
being a forgery, all transactions emanating from it are null and void. Was the signature forged?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

NO.

Sec. 22 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, “the handwriting of a person may be proved by any witness
who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he has seen the person write, or has seen
writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged, and has thus acquired
knowledge of the handwriting of such person. Evidence respecting the hand writing may also be given
by comparison, made by the witness or the court, with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the
party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge.”

Settled is the rule that forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved by clear, positive and
convincing evidence by the party alleging the same. Be that as it may, having in mind that the finding
of forgery does not depend entirely on the testimonies of handwriting experts because the judge must
conduct an independent examination of a questioned signature in order to arrive at a reasonable
conclusion as to its authenticity.

THE UNITED STATES v. REGINO MANABAT

G.R. No. L-3093. December 22, 1906
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal

Opinion Rule
QUESTION

X was charged with the crime of robbery on the night of the 6th of May, 1904 in the house of Y
during her husband’s absence. The night was dark and there was no light in the house and the only
mode by which the witness was able to identify the accused was by the sound of his voice. It was
shown she and the accused had known each other intimately since their youth, having lived in the
same barrio for many years, so that there was nothing unreasonable in her assertion that she
recognized the accused by his voice, although she could not see his face on account of the darkness.
Should identification be sufficient as evidence?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

YES.

An identification by the sound of the voice of the accused is sufficient. We do not think the evidence
as to the alibi can be accepted in view of the material contradictions in the statements of the witnesses,
and we are of opinion that, even though the confession made before the justice of the peace were
excluded from the record, the evidence of the complaining witness is sufficient under all the
circumstances to establish the guilt of the accused.

VICENTE MANZANO, JR., v. MARCELINO GARCIA

G.R. No.  179323 : November 28, 2011
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal

Opinion Rule
QUESTION

A parcel of land was issued in the name of X. The property was the subject of a deed of pacto de
retro sale allegedly executed by X in favor of Y. X alleged that the document evidencing the pacto de
retro sale was a forgery. He claimed that he and his wife were in the USA and the signatures
appearing in the pacto de retro sale were not his and his wife’s. He presented his passport and driver’s
license, both of which bear an entirely different signature than what appeared in the pacto de
retro sale document. Was there forgery?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:

YES.

Sec. 22 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, “the handwriting of a person may be proved by any witness
who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he has seen the person write, or has seen
writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged, and has thus acquired
knowledge of the handwriting of such person. Evidence respecting the hand writing may also be given
by comparison, made by the witness or the court, with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the
party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge.”

A finding of forgery does not depend entirely on the testimonies of handwriting experts, because the
judge must conduct an examination of the questioned signature in order to arrive at a reasonable
conclusion as to its authenticity. The opinions of handwriting experts are not binding upon courts,
especially when the question involved is mere handwriting similarity or dissimilarity, which can be
determined by a visual comparison of specimens of the questioned signatures with those of the
currently existing ones.

AUGUSTO GOMEZ v. MARIA RITA GOMEZ-SAMSON

G.R. NO. 156284 : February 6, 2007
Digested by: Hannah C. Sabal

Opinion Rule
QUESTION

X claims that, in the two Deeds of Donation he is impugning, the signatures of the Y were jotted
down before the bodies of the Deeds were typewritten. X requested to declare false, null and void  ab
initio, and/or the deed of donation inter vivos be nullified. The Deeds of Donation were signed by Y
in their completed form in the presence of Notary Public, Z.  X alleged that Z is bias and a fraud. Z
had been carefully examined by the trial court, which found them to be credible. Should expert
opinion be given due weight?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
YES.
The relative weight and sufficiency of expert testimony is peculiarly within the province of the trial
court to decide, considering the ability and character of the witness, his actions upon the witness
stand, the weight and process of the reasoning by which he has supported his opinion, his possible
bias in favor of the side for whom he testifies, the fact that he is a paid witness, the relative
opportunities for study or observation of the matters about which he testifies, and any other matters
which serve to illuminate his statements. The opinion of the expert may not be arbitrarily rejected; it
is to be considered by the court in view of all the facts and circumstances in the case and when
common knowledge utterly fails, the expert opinion may be given controlling effect.