CASE 26

TORRES & LOPEZ DE BUENO vs. LOPEZ

GR No. 24569 February 26, 1926

FACTS: Tomas Rodriguez y Lopez, single, died on February, 25, 1924 leaving all his estate to
Vicente Lopez. On August 10, 1923, Tomas Rodriguez designated Vicente Lopez as
administrator of his property due to his feeble health, such was questioned by Margarita Lopez,
CFI of Manila concluded Vicente Lopez as Tomas Rodriguezs guardian.
Tomas Rodriguez voiced out the need to form a will, and Vicente Lopez has procured Judge
Maximino Mina. Manuel Torres, one of the executors named in the will, asked the will to be
allowed. Such was contested by Manuel Lopez on the grounds:
(a) that testator lacked mental capacity because at the time of institution he was
suffering senile dementia and was under guardianship;
(b) that undue influence had been exercised by the persons benefited; and
(c) that the signature of Rodriguez was obtained through fraud and deceit.(Luz
Lopez allegedly deceived Tomas Rodriguez to sign by stating that such document he was about
to sign was in connection with a complaint against Dr. Boanan, one of the witness of the signing
of the will).
Trial Court denied legalization of the will on the ground of lack of mental capacity at the
signing of the will by the testator.

ISSUES:
(1) Whether or not Tomas Rodriguez has testamentary capacity to consider the will valid?
(2) Whether or not there was undue influence in the procurement of the signature of Tomas
Rodriguez in the will?

RULING: Yes. Tomas Rodriguez has testamentary capacity to constitute a will. Though
there was conflict of medical opinions on the soundness of mind of the testator. (Drs. Calderon,
Domingo, Herrera claimed that testator had full understanding of the acts he was performing and
that they were witnesses in the said signing of the will; Drs. Delos Angeles, Tietze and Burke
certified that Rodriguez was of unsound mind and is diagnosed of senile dementia).
Code of Civil procedure prescribes a requisite that the testator be of sound mind, a sound
mind is a disposing mind. One of the grounds of disallowing a will is if the testator is insane or
otherwise incapable of the execution. With such the Court has adopted a definition of
Testamentary Capacity as: The capacity to comprehend the nature of the transaction in
which the testator is engaged at the time, to recollect the property to be disposed of and the
persons 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 .The presumption is that every adult is sane. It is only when those seeking to overthrow
the will have clearly established the charge of mental incapacity that the courts will intervene to
set aside a testamentary document.