ISSUES & HOLDING
WON Razon's testimony is within the prohibition of the dead man's statute.
NO. The case was not filed
the administrator of the estate, nor was it filed upon claims
[The case was filed by the
Vicente Chuidian to recover the shares of stock.]
Therefore, Razon's testimony is ADMISSIBLE.
WON Razon's oral testimony as regards the true nature of his agreement with the late Juan Chuidian is sufficient to prove his ownership over the said 1,500 shares of stock.
Who is the owner of the shares of stock?
Juan Chuidian. He gets the cash and stock dividends plus pre-emptive rights (as prayed for in the MR at IAC).
EVIDENCE-RELATED: THE DEAD MAN'S STATUTE
Section 20(a) Rule 130 of the Rules of Court
Disqualification by reason of interest or relationship
The following persons cannot testify as to matters in which they are interested directly or indirectly, as herein enumerated.
(a) Parties or assignors of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted,
against an executor
or other representative of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind,
upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person
or against such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to any matter of fact accruing before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind.
Section 23, Rule 130, of the Revised Rules on Evidence
Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party.
Parties or assignors of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against an executor or administrator or other representative of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or against such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind.(20a)
Purpose of the rule
If persons having a claim against the estate of the deceased or his properties were allowed to testify as to the supposed statements made by him (deceased person), many would be tempted to falsely impute statements to deceased persons as the latter can no longer deny or refute them, thus unjustly subjecting their properties or rights to false or unscrupulous claims or demands.
The purpose of the law is to guard against the temptation to give false testimony in regard to the transaction in question on the part of the surviving party.
When the rule is applicable
It is applicable to a case
the administrator or its representative of an estate upon a claim
the estate of the deceased person.
In this case
The case was filed by the
Vicente Chuidian to recover shares allegedly owned by Juan Chuidian.
Remember that the IAC excluded Enrique Razon's testimony.
Chuidian never objected to Razon's testimony. Razon's testimony was subject to cross-examination by Vicente Chuidian's counsel. Granting that Razon's testimony is within the prohibition of the dead man's statute, Chuidian is deemed to have waived the rule.
Cruz v. CA
- The court cannot disregard evidence which would ordinarily be incompetent under the rules but has been rendered admissible by the failure of a party to object thereto
Marella v. Reyes
- Once admitted, the testimony is in the case for what it is worth and the judge has no power to disregard it for the sole reason that it could have been excluded, if it had been objected to, nor to strike it out on its own motion
THE MAIN CASE (RE: OWNERSHIP OF THE SHARES OF STOCK)
Relevant rules re: transfer of shares of stock
Embassy Farms, Inc. v. Court of Appeals
Shares of stock may be transferred by delivery to the transferee of the certificate properly indorsed. Title may be vested in the transferee by the delivery of the duly indorsed certificate of stock [BP 68, Sec. 3 (Corporation Code)]
However, no transfer shall be valid, except as between the parties until the transfer is properly recorded in the books of the corporation [Corporation Code, Sec. 63; Corporation Law, Sec. 35]