B2022 REPORTS ANNOTATED
Bagtas v Paguio Bagtas v Paguio
I. Recit-ready summary
This is an appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of the Province of
Bataan, admitting to probate a document which was offered as the last will and
testament of Pioquinto Paguio y Pizarro.
15 years before the death of the testator, he suffered paralysis of the left side of his
body. A few years before death, he became hearing impaired and lost the power of
speech. However, he could still write and communicate through signs. The
opponents are opposing the probation of the will, claiming that (1) the will didn’t
follow formalities and requirements, and that the (2) testator wasn’t in the full
enjoyment and use of his mental faculties, without mental capacity necessary to
execute a valid will.
WON the execution of the will is compliant with the formalities and requirements
and WON the testator had the mental capacity necessary to execute a valid will –
YES
In this jurisdiction the presumption of law is in favor of the mental capacity of the
testator and the burden is upon the contestants of the will to prove the lack of
testamentary capacity. Applying such to the case at hand, SC held that since the
testator was never adjudged insane by a court of competent jurisdiction, this
presumption continues, and it is incumbent upon the opponents to overcome this. SC
held they failed to do so.
What does it take for a testator to be considered as “crazy”? (syllabus question)
SC held that the courts have repeatedly held that mere weakness of mind and body,
induced by age and disease do not render a person incapable of making a will.
Perfect soundness of mind is not essential to testamentary capacity. A testator may
be afflicted with a variety of mental weaknesses, disorders, or peculiarities and still
be capable in law of executing a valid will.
"To constitute a sound and disposing mind, it is not necessary that the mind shall be
wholly unbroken, unimpaired, or unshattered by disease or otherwise, or that the
testator should be in the full possession of his reasoning faculties."
“Neither age, nor sickness, nor extreme distress, nor debility of body will affect the
capacity to make a will, if sufficient intelligence remains. The failure of memory is
not sufficient to create the incapacity, unless it be total, or extend to his immediate
family or property. . . . “
Applying this to the case, SC held that the striking change in the physical and
mental vigor of the testator during the last years of his life may have led some of
those who knew him in his earlier days to entertain doubts as to his mental capacity
to make a will, yet we think that the statements of the witnesses to the execution of
G.R. NO: 6801
ARTICLE; TOPIC OF CASE: What does it take for a testator to be considered as “crazy
March 14, 1912
the will and the statements of the conduct of the testator at that time all indicate that
he unquestionably had mental capacity and that he exercised it on this occasion.
II. Facts of the case
Decedent – Bagtas
Executrix – Juliana Bagtas (widow)
Opponents – son and several grandchildren by a former marriage, children of a
deceased daughter
This is an appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of the Province of
Bataan, admitting to probate a document which was offered as the last will and
testament of Pioquinto Paguio y Pizarro. The will purports to have been executed in
the pueblo of Pilar, Province of Bataan, on the 19th day of April, 1908. The testator
died on the 28th of September, 1909, a year and five months following the date of
the execution of the will. The will was propounded by the executrix, Juliana Bagtas,
widow of the decedent, and the opponents are a son and several grandchildren by a
former marriage, the latter being the children of a deceased daughte
Testator Paguio, 15 years before his death, suffered paralysis of the left side of his
body. A few years before death, he became hearing impaired and lost the power of
speech. However, he could still write and communicate through signs
At the time of the execution of the will, in attendance were 4 testamentary
witnesses: Agustin, Anacleto, Francisco, and Pedro Paguio, attorney, Señor Marco,
Florentino Ramos. They testified about the process and what happened during the
execution of the will:
- Testator wrote out in pieces of paper notes regarding the disposition of his
property, delivered to Marco who transcribed them and put them in form.
- The pieces of paper where the notes were written down were delivered to
the attorney by the testator; the attorney read each of them and asked
testator if these were his testamentary dispositions, to which the testator
assented by an affirmative movement of his head.
- After the will as a whole has been written by the attorney, it was read in a
loud voice in the presence of the testator and the witnesses.
- Marco gave the document to the testator for review. Afterwards, testator
signed it in the presence of the witnesses and they in turn signed it in the
presence of the testator and each other.
Lower court held that the execution of the will fully complied with the formalities of
Civil Procedure. CFI admitted to probate a document which was offered as the last
will and testament of Pioquinto Paguio y Pizarro.
PONENTE: Trent, J.
DIGEST MAKER: Alec
 B2022 REPORTS ANNOTATED March 14, 1912
Bagtas v Paguio Bagtas v Paguio

Opponents contends that (1) the will didn’t follow formalities and requirements, and a. Doctor Basa stated that he had attended the testator some four or
that the (2) testator wasn’t in the full enjoyment and use of his mental faculties, five years prior to his death and that the latter had suffered from
without mental capacity necessary to execute a valid will. a cerebral congestion from which the paralysis resulted. He said
that he “cannot say exactly whether he was in his right mind, but
III. Issue/s noted some mental disorder because he didn’t answer me when I
spoke to him”
1. WON the execution of the will is compliant with the formalities and b. Doctor Viado had never seen the testator but his answer was in a
requirements – YES. reply to a hypothetical question as to what would be the mental
2. WON the testator had the mental capacity necessary to execute a valid condition of a person who was 79 years old and suffered the
will – YES same health problems the testator did. He basically replied about
symptoms and consequences of the disease but did not directly
say whether testator had a mental disorder. He only said that he
IV. Ratio/Legal Basis
is unable to certify the mental condition of a person who was
suffering from such disease.
Based on the facts testified by the witnesses regarding the conduct of the execution
of the will, SC held that the facts of record with reference to the execution of the
SC held that the testimonies of the physicians doesn’t strengthen the cause of the
will and we are in perfect accord with the judgment of the lower court that the
oppositors since neither of them attempted to state what the testator’s mental
formalities of the Code of Civil Procedure have been fully complied with.
condition was. There’s no doubt that the mental infirmities of the testator were very
serious but such will not be enough to conclude that he was without any mental
Regarding the issue on the alleged mental incapacity of the testator at the time of the
capacity to dispose of his property by will.
execution of the will, SC held that the testator was mentally capacitated to execute a
valid will. The court arrived at this decision through the testimonies of the witnesses
The weight of authority is in support of the principle that it is only when those
as well as various jurisprudence.
seeking to overthrow the will have clearly established the charge of mental
incapacity that the courts will intervene to set aside a testamentary document of this
Testimonies
character. In this jurisdiction the presumption of law is in favor of the mental
1. One of the attesting witnesses testified that at the time of the execution of
capacity of the testator and the burden is upon the contestants of the will to prove
the will the testator was in his right mind, and that although he was
the lack of testamentary capacity.
seriously ill, he indicated by movements of his head what his wishes were.
2. Another of the attesting witnesses stated that he was not able to say
Applying such to the case at hand, SC held that since the testator was never
whether decedent had the full use of his mental faculties or not, because
adjudged insane by a court of competent jurisdiction, this presumption continues,
he had been ill for some years, and that he (the witness) was not a
and it is incumbent upon the opponents to overcome this. SC held they failed to do
physician.
so.
3. Pedro Paguio, the other subscribing witness, was unable to state whether
or not the will was the wish of the testator. The only reasons he gave for
What does it take for a testator to be considered as “crazy”? (syllabus question)
his statement were the infirmity and advanced age of the testator and the
fact that he was unable to speak. He also stated that the testator signed the
SC held that the courts have repeatedly held that mere weakness of mind and
will, and he verified his own signature as a subscribing witness.
body, induced by age and disease do not render a person incapable of making a
4. Florentino Ramos (case didn’t mention who he was exactly), though not
will. The authorities, both medical and legal, are universal in the statement that the
an attesting witness, stated that he was present when the will was executed
question of mental capacity is one of degree, and that there are many gradations
and his testimony was cumulative in corroboration of the manner in which
from the highest degree of mental soundness to the lowest conditions of diseased
the will was executed and as to the fact that the testator signed the will. He
mentality which are denominated as insanity and idiocy.
also stated that he had frequently transacted business for the decedent, had
written letters and made inventories of his property. With this, he testified
Perfect soundness of mind is not essential to testamentary capacity. A testator may
that the decedent was able to communicate his throughs by writing.
be afflicted with a variety of mental weaknesses, disorders, or peculiarities and still
5. There were 2 physicians, Doctor Basa and Doctor Viado:

G.R. NO: 6801 PONENTE: Trent, J.

ARTICLE; TOPIC OF CASE: What does it take for a testator to be considered as “crazy DIGEST MAKER: Alec
 B2022 REPORTS ANNOTATED March 14, 1912
Bagtas v Paguio Bagtas v Paguio

be capable in law of executing a valid will. (volume 28, page 70, of the American
and English Encyclopedia of Law)
The rule relating to testamentary capacity is stated in Buswell on Insanity, section
365, and quoted with approval in Campbell vs. Campbell states that: "To constitute
a sound and disposing mind, it is not necessary that the mind shall be wholly
unbroken, unimpaired, or unshattered by disease or otherwise, or that the testator
should be in the full possession of his reasoning faculties."
In another authority, the rule is to ask: were his mind and memory sufficiently sound
to enable him to know and understand the business in which he was engaged at the
time when he executed his will?
In Wilson v Mitchell, the court held that: "Neither age, nor sickness, nor extreme
distress, nor debility of body will affect the capacity to make a will, if sufficient
intelligence remains. The failure of memory is not sufficient to create the incapacity,
unless it be total, or extend to his immediate family or property. . . . “ (see case facts
in the notes)
"Neither age, nor sickness, nor extreme distress, nor debility of body will affect the
capacity to make a will, if sufficient intelligence remains. The failure of memory is
not sufficient to create the incapacity, unless it be total, or extend to his immediate
family or property. . . .
xxx xxx xxx
"Dougal (the testator) had lived over one hundred years before he made the will, and
his physical and mental weakness and defective memory were in striking contrast
with their strength in the meridian of his life. He was blind; not deaf, but hearing
impaired; his mind acted slowly, he was forgetful of recent events, especially of
names, and repeated questions in conversation; and sometimes, when aroused from
sleep or slumber, would seem bewildered. It is not singular that some of those who
had known him when he was remarkable for vigor and intelligence, are of the
opinion that his reason was so far gone that he was incapable of making a will,
although they never heard him utter an irrational expression."

Applying this to the case, SC held that the striking change in the physical and
mental vigor of the testator during the last years of his life may have led some of
those who knew him in his earlier days to entertain doubts as to his mental capacity
to make a will, yet we think that the statements of the witnesses to the execution of
the will and the statements of the conduct of the testator at that time all indicate that
he unquestionably had mental capacity and that he exercised it on this occasion.

However, at the time of the execution of the will, it doesn’t appear that his conduct
was irrational in any particular manner. He seems to have comprehended clearly
what the nature of the business was in which he was engaged. The evidence shows
that the writing and execution of the will occupied a period of several hours and that
the testator was present during all this time, taking an active part in all the
proceedings. Again, the will in the case at bar is perfectly reasonable and its
dispositions are those of a rational person.

V. Notes

In Wilson vs. Mitchell (101 Penn., 495), the following facts appeared upon the trial
of the case: The testator died at the age of nearly 102 years. In his early years he was
an intelligent and well informed man. About seven years prior to his death he
suffered a paralytic stroke and from that time his mind and memory were much
enfeebled. He became very dull of hearing and in consequence of the shrinking of
his brain he was affected with senile cataract causing total blindness. He became
filthy and obscene in his habits, although formerly he was observant of the
proprieties of life. The court, in commenting upon the case, said:

G.R. NO: 6801 PONENTE: Trent, J.

ARTICLE; TOPIC OF CASE: What does it take for a testator to be considered as “crazy DIGEST MAKER: Alec