2) 

Cases
Angela M. Butte vs. Manuel Uy & Sons, Inc., G.R. No. L-15499, February 28, 1962

Succession; When rights transmitted to heirs; Scope of right of succession.—The rights to the
succession of a deceaseed person are transmitted to his heirs from the moment of his death, and
the includes all property rights and obligations that survive the decedent.

National Housing Authority vs. Almeida, G.R. No. 162784, June 22, 2007

Same; Same; Elements of Testamentary Succession.—We need not delve into the validity of the
will. The issue is for the probate court to determine. We affirm the Court of Appeals and the
Regional Trial Court which noted that it has an element of testamentary disposition where (1) it
devolved and transferred property; (2) the effect of which shall transpire upon the death of the
instrument maker.

Estate of Hemady vs. Luzon Surety, G.R. No. L-8437, November 28, 1956

CONTRACTS; BlNDING EFFECT OF CONTRACTS UPON HEIRS OF DECEASED

PARTY.—The binding effect of contracts upon the heirs of the deceased party is not altered by
the provision in the Rules of Court that money debts of a deceased must be liquidated and paid
from his estate before the residue is distributed among said heirs (Rule 89). The reason is that
whatever payment is thus made from the estate is ultimately a payment by the heirs and
distributees, since the amount of the paid claim in fact diminishes or reduces the shares that the
heirs would have been entitled to receive. The general rule, therefore, is that a party’s contractual
rights and obligations are transmissible to the successors.

Unionbank vs. Santibanez, G.R. No. 149926, February 23, 2005

Civil Law; Settlement of Estate; Jurisdictions; Well-settled is the rule that a probate court has the
jurisdiction to determine all the properties of the deceased, to determine whether they should or
should not be included in the inventory or list of properties to be administered.

Same; Same; Wills; Partition; In our jurisdiction, the rule is that there can be no valid partition
among the heirs until after the will has been probated.—

Same; Same; Same; Same; Every act intended to put an end to indivision among co-heirs and
legatees or devisees is deemed to be a partition although it should purport to be a sale, an
exchange, a compromise or any other transaction.—
Same; Same; Same; Filing of a money claim against the decedent’s estate in the probate court is
mandatory.—

Santos vs. Blas G.R., No. L-14070, March 29, 1961

WILLS AND TESTAMENTS; FUTURE INHERITANCE; WHEN AGREEMENT TO

TRANSMIT ONE-HALF OF THE CONJUGAL SHARE NOT DEEMED A CONTRACT ON
FUTURE INHERITANCE. — A document signed by the testator’s wife, promising that she
would respect and obey all the dispositions in the latter’s will, and that she would hold one-half
of her share in the conjugal assets in trust for the heirs and legatees of her husband in his will,
with the obligation of conveying the same to such of his heirs or legatees as she might choose in
her last will and testament, is a compromise and at the same time a contract with sufficient cause
or consideration.

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ACCRUAL OF CAUSE OF ACTION UPON DEATH. — The action to enforce
the wife’s promise to convey in her testament, upon her death, one-half of the conjugal
properties she would receive as her share in the conjugal properties, did not arise until and after
her death when it was found that she did not comply with her promise. (Article 1969, old Civil
Code).

3. ID.; ID.; DEFINITION. — Future inheritance is any property or right not in existence or
capable of determination at the time of the contract, that a person may in the future acquire by
succession.

Articles 783 to 803

Articles 886, 891, 863, 874, 875, 1031, 838
1. Nepomuceno vs. CA, G.R. No. L-62952, October 9, 1985

Succession; Wills; Jurisdiction; The fact that the probate court declared a devise made in a will
null and void will be sustained where no useful purpose will be served by requiring the filing of a
separate civil action and restricting the court only to the issue of extrinsic validity of the will.

Same; Same; A devise given by a married man estranged from his wife for 22 years prior to his
death, to a woman with whom he has been living for said period of time is void
2. Seangio vs. Reyes, G. R. No. 140371-72, November 27, 2006

Succession; Wills; Disinheritance; Maltreatment; For disinheritance to be valid, Article 916 of

the Civil Code requires that the same must be ef ected through a will wherein the legal cause
therefor shall be specified; Maltreatment of a parent by a child presents a sufficient cause for the
disinheritance of the latter.

Same; Same; Same; Holographic Wills; A holographic will must be entirely written, dated, and
signed by the hand of the testator himself—it is subject to no other form, and may be made in or
out of the Philippines, and need not be witnessed.

Same; Same; Same; Same; It is a fundamental principle that the intent or the will of the testator,
expressed in the form and within the limits prescribed by law, must be recognized as the supreme
law in succession; Holographic wills, being usually prepared by one who is not learned in the
law, should be construed more liberally than the ones drawn by an expert, taking into account the
circumstances surrounding the execution of the instrument and the intention of the testator.—
3. De Roma vs. CA, G.R. No. L-46903, July 23, 1987

Succession; Intestacy; Collation; Fact that a donation is irrevocable does not necessarily exempt
the donated properties from collation as required under Art. 1061, Civil Code; Given the precise
language of the deed of donation the decedent-donor would have included an express prohibition
to collate if that had been the donor's intention.

Intention to exempt donated properties from collation should be expressed plainly and
unequivocally as an exception to the general rule in Art. 1062, Civil Code; Absent such a clear
indication of that intention, the rule not the exception should be applied.—T
4. Dizon-Rivera vs. Dizon, G.R. No. L-24561, June 30, 1970

Succession; Testamentary succession; Wills; Interpretation of provisions of wills; Intention of

testator paramount.—The testator's wishes and intention constitute the first and principal law in
the matter of testaments, and to paraphrase an early decision of the Supreme Court of Spain,
when expressed clearly and precisely in his last will amount to the only law whose mandate must
imperatively be faithfully obeyed and complied with by his executors, heirs and devisees and
legatees, and neither these interested parties nor the courts may substitute their own criterion for
the testator's wiIl.

Same; Same; Same; Interpretation of wills; Ef ect of use of words "I bequeath" in testament.—
The repeated use of the words "I bequeath" in the testamentary dispositions acquire no legal
significance, such as to convert the same into devises to be taken solely from the free one-half
disposable portion of the estate where the testator's intent that his testamentary dispositions were
by way of adjudications to the beneficiaries as heirs and not as mere devisees, is clear and that
said dispositions were borne out by the use of phrase "my heirs in this testament" referring to the
"devisees."

5. Vda. de Villaflor vs. Juico, G.R. No. L-15737, February 28, 1962

Wills and testaments; Interpretation; Intent of testator must govern.— The intention and wishes
of the testator, when clearly expressed in his will, constitute the fixed law of interpretation, and
all questions raised at the trial, relative to its execution and fulfillment, must be settled in
accordance therewith, following the plain and literal meaning of the testator's words, unless it
clearly appears that his intention was otherwise. (In re Estate of Calderon,