sic itur ad astra

Garcia vs. Lacuesta, G.R. No L-4067, November 29, 1957   | Cross Antero Mercado  created a will. Atty. Florentino Javier appeared to have signed the will on behalf of Antero Mercado, followed by the phrase "A reugo del testator" and his own name. Antero Mercado allegedly marked a cross after his name.  The petitioner argues that the cross written by the testator could be considered a valid signature, similar to a thumbmark. The court ruled that the attestation clause is fatally defective for failing to state that Antero Mercado caused Atty. Florentino Javier to write the testator's name under his express direction. The court also held that the  cross cannot and does not have the trustworthiness of a thumbmark. Cagro vs. Cagro, G.R. No. L-5826, April 29, 1953   |  Unsigned Attestation Vicente Cagro  executed a will. The signatures of the three witnesses to the will do not appear at the bottom of the attestation clause, although the page containing the s...

Art. 804.   Every will must be in writing and executed in a language or dialect known to the testator. Suroza vs Honrado, A.M. No. 2026-CFI, December 19, 1981 |  Language The complainant was the wife of the preterited heir.  She filed an administrative complaint in the Supreme Court against the respondent Judge  Reynaldo P. Honrado  alleging that the Judge had probated a fraudulent will of Marcelina Salvador Suroza, which named a supposed granddaughter as the sole heir, leaving nothing for her supposed living son. The will was written in English, a language not known to the illiterate testatrix , and it was suspected of being forged because the testatrix and attesting witnesses did not appear before the notary , as admitted by the notary himself. The Supreme Court ruled that respondent Judge was guilty of inexcusable negligence and dereliction of duty for his unproper disposition of the testate case which might have resulted in a miscarriage of justice and impo...

   RA 7659 | Criminal Law  Names Joseph Ejercito Estrada - President of the Philippines Charge/Violation RA 7659 Plunder Action PETITION to declare Republic Act No. 7080 ( An Act Defining and Penalizing the Crime of Plunder) as amended by RA No. 7659 unconstitutional Facts:  Petitioner Joseph Ejercito Estrada, filed a petition to declare Republic Act No. 7080, as amended, unconstitutional.  Specifically, the provisions claimed by petitioner to have  transgressed constitutional boundaries are  Secs. 1, par. (d), 2 and 4. (See notes.) Issues: (I) WoN Plunder Law is unconstitutional for being vague; (II) WoN Plunder Law requires less evidence for proving the predicate crimes of plunder and therefore violates the rights of the accused to due process; and, (III) WoN Plunder as defined in RA 7080 is a malum prohibitum, and if so, whether it is within the power of Congress to so classify it. Contention: (I) Petitioner, bewails the failure of the law...