TEODORA NEYRA, PILAR DE GUZMAN AND MARIA JACOEO VDA. DE BLANCO, PETITIONERS AND APPELLANTS, VS.TRINIDAD NEYRA AND EUSTAQUIO MENDOZA, OPPOSITORS AND APPELLEES.

This is an appeal from a decree rendered by the Hon. Gervasio
Diaz, Judge of the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila, on December
3, 1943, admitting to probate a will dated November 3, 1942, executed
by the deceased Encarnacion Neyra; at the same time denying the
probate of a previous will dated September 14, 1939, alleged to have
been executed by the said testatrix.

Trinidad Neyra, beneficiary in the will executed on November 3,
1942, filed, on November 10, 1942, a petition in the Court of First
Instance of Manila, for the probate of said will.

On December 19, 1942, Teodora Neyra, Filar de Guzman, and Maria
Jacobo Vda. de Blanco, who had not been named as beneficiaries in said
will, filed on opposition to the probate of the said will dated November
3, 1942, alleging (1) that at the time of the alleged execution of the
said will, the testatrix Encarnacion Neyra no longer possessed
testamentary capacity; (2) that her thumb marks on said instrument had
been procured by means of fraud by petitioner Trinidad Neyra, and that
Encarnacion Neyra never intended to consider said document as will; (3)
that the alleged will, dated November 3, 1942, had not been executed in
the manner and form prescribed by law; and (4) that Encarnacion Neyra,
since September 14, 1939, had executed a will, naming as beneficiaries
said oppositors and others, and that said will had never been revoked or
amended in any manner whatsoever.

On December 26, 1942, petitioner Trinidad Neyra filed a reply denying the allegations in the opposition.

Subsequently, said oppositors filed a counter petition, asking for
the probate of the first will executed by Encarnacion Neyra, on
September 14, 1939, marked as Exhibit 16. On March 16, 1943, the
legatees Trinidad Neyra and Eustaquio Mendoza filed their opposition to
the probate of said will marked as Exhibit 16, and amended said
op­position, on September 15, 1943, to which Teodora Neyra and the
others filed a reply, on September 20, 1943.

On the dates set for the hearing on the petition filed by Trinidad
Neyra, and the counter petition mentioned above, said petitioner as
well as the oppositors, presented evidenee, testimonial and documentary.
The witnesses presented by the petitioner Trinidad Neyra were Mons.
Vicente Fernandez, Rev. Fr. Teodoro Garcia, Sor. Andrea Montejo, Dr.
Moises B. Abad, Dr. Eladio A. Aldecoa, Atty. Ricardo Sikat, petitioner
Trinidad Neyra herself, and Atty. Alejandro M. Panis, who had acted as
scrivener in the preparation of said will dated November 3, 1942.

Teodora Neyra and the other oppositors also presented several
witnesses, the principal among whom were Presentacion Blanco, Ceferina
de la Cruz, Acislo Manuel, Dr. Dionisio Parulan, an alleged medical
expert, and the oppositors Teodora Neyra and Pilar de Guzman themselves.

After considering the evidence, the lower court rendered a decree
admitting to probate the will dated November 3, 1942; at the same time
denying the probate of the will dated September 14, 1939.

From said decision Teodora Neyra and the other oppositors appealed
to the Court of Appeals for the City of Manila, assigning several
errors, which may be reduced to the following, to wit, that the trial
court erred (1) in rinding that Encarnacion Neyra wanted to make a new
will; (2) in declaring that there was reconciliation between Encarnacion
Neyra and her sister Trinidad; (3) in accepting as satisfactory the
evidence submitted by the petitioner; (4) in ignoring the evidence
submitted by the oppositors; and (5) in not admitting to probate the
will dated September 14, 1939.

The evidence, testimonial and documentary, adduced during the
trial of the case in the court below, has satisfactorily, and
sufficiently established the following facts:

That Severo Neyra died intestate in the City of Manila, on May 6,
1938, leaving certain properties and two children, by his first
marriage, named Encarnacion Neyra and Trinidad Neyra, and several other
relatives; that after the death of Severo Neyra, the two sister’s,
Encarnacion Neyra and Trinidad Neyra, had serious quar­rels, in
connection with the properties left by their deceased father, and so
serious were their dissensions that, after March 31, 1939, they had two
litigations in the Court of First Instance of Manila, concerning said
properties (Exhibits 8 and 9) : In the first case, filed on March 31,
1939, Trinidad Neyra and others demanded from Encarnacion Neyra et al.
the annulment of the sale of the property located at No. 366 Raon
Street, Manila, and it was finally decided in favor of the defendants in
the Court of First Instance and in .the Court of Appeals, on December
21, 1943 (G. R. No. 8162, Exhibit 9).

In the second case, filed on October 25, 1939, Trinidad Neyra demanded from Encarnacion Neyra, one-half (1/2)
of the property described therein, and one-half (1/2) of the rents, and
the Court of First Instance decided in favor of the plaintiff, but at
the same time awarded in favor of the defendant P727.77, under her
counterclaim; and Trinidad Neyra again elevated the case to the Court of
Appeals for Manila (G. R. No. 8075) Exhibit 8, which was decided,
pursuant to the document of compromise marked as Exhibit D; and the
petition for reconsideration filed therein still remains undecided.

That Encarnacion Neyra, who had remained single, and who had no
longer any ascendants, executed a will on September 14, 1939, marked
Exhibit 16, disposing of her properties in favor of the “Congregacion de
Religiosas de la Virgen Maria” and her other relatives named Teodora
Neyra, Pilar de Guzman and Maria Jacobo Vda. de Blanco, making no
provision whatsoever in said will in favor of her only sister Trinidad
Neyra, who had become her bitter ene­my; that when the said will was
brought to the attention of the authorities of said Congregation, after
due deliberation and consideration, said religious organization declined
the bounty offered by Encarnacion Neyra, and said decision of the
Congregation was duly communicated to her; that in order to overcome the
difficulties encountered by said religious organization in not
accepting the generosity of Encarnacion Neyra, the latter decided to
make a new will, and for that purpose, about one week before her death,
sent for one Ricardo Sikat, an attorney working in the Law Offices of
Messrs. Feria and Lao, and gave him instructions for the preparation of a
new will; that Attorney Sikat, instead of preparing a new
will, in accordance with the express instructions given by Encarnacion
Neyra, merely prepared a draft in the form of a codicil, marked as
Exhibit M, amending said will, dated September 14, 1939, again naming
said religious organization, among others, as beneficiary, and said
draft of a codicil was also forwarded to the authorities of said
religious organization, for their consideration and acceptance.

In the meanwhile, Encarnacion Neyra had become se­riously ill,
suffering from Addison’s disease, and on October 31, 1942, she sent for
her religious adviser and confessor, Mons. Vicente Fernandez of the
Quiapo Church to make confession, after which she expressed her desire
to have a mass celebrated in her house at No. 366 Raon Street, City of
Manila, so that she might take holy communion, in view of her condition;
that following the request of Encarnacion Neyra, Mons. Fernandez caused
the necessary arrangements to be made for the celebration of holy mass
in the house of Encarnacion Neyra, and, as a matter of fact, on November
1, 1942, holy mass was solemnized in her house, Fr. Teodoro Garcia,
also of the Quiapo Church, officiating in said ceremony, on which
occasion, Encarnacion Neyra, who remained in bed, took holy communion;
that after said religious ceremony had been terminated, Father Garcia
talked to Encarnacion Neyra and advised reconciliation between the two
sisters, Encarnacion Neyra and Trinidad Neyra. Encarnacion Neyra
accepted said advice and at about noon of the same day (November 1,
1942), sent Eustaquio Mendoza to fetch her sister Trinidad Neyra, who
came at about 2.30 that same afternoon; that on seeing one another, the
two greeted each other in a most affectionate manner, and became
reconciled; that the two had a long and cordial conversation, in the
course of which the two sisters also talked about the properties left by
their deceased father and their litigations which had reached the Court
of Appeals for the City of Manila, and they agreed to have the said
appeal dismissed, on the condition that the property involved therein,
consisting of a small house and lot, should be given exclusively to
Trinidad Neyra, on the condition that the latter should waive her claim
for her share in the rents of said property, while under the
administration of Encarnacion Neyra, and that the two should renounce
their mutual claims against one another, it was also agreed between the
two sisters to send for Atty. Alejandro M. Panis, to prepare the
necessary document embodying the said agreement, but Attorney Panis
could come only in the afternoon of the following day, November 2, 1942,
when Encarnacion gave him instructions for the preparation of the
document embodying their agreement, and other instructions relative to
the disposition she wanted to make of her properties in her last will
and testament; that Attorney Panis prepared said document of compromise
or agreement marked as Exhibit D, as well as the new will and testament
marked as Exhibit C, naming Trinidad Neyra and Eustaquio Mendoza
beneficiaries therein, pursuant to the express instructions given by
Encarnacion Neyra, and said instruments were ready for signature on
November 8, 1942; that in the afternoon of that day, November 3, 1942,
Attorney Panis read said will and testament marked as Exhibit D to
Encarnacion Neyra slowly and in a loud voice, in the presence of Fr,
Teodoro Garcia, Dr. Moises B. Abad, Dr. Eladio Aldecoa, herein
petitioner Trinidad Neyra, and others, after which he asked her if its
terms were in accordance with her wishes, if she had anything else to
add, or anything to be changed in said will; and as Encarnacion Neyra
stated that the terms of said will were in accordance with her wishes
and express instructions, she asked for the pad and the will Exhibit C
and, with the help of a son of herein petitioner, placed her thumb mark
at the foot of said will, in the presence of the three attesting
witnesses, Dr. Moises B. Abad, Dr. Eladio R. Aldecoa, and Atty.
Alejandro M. Panis, after which the attesting witnesses signed at the
foot of the document, in the presence of the testatrix Encarnacion
Neyra, and of each and everyone of the other attesting witnesses. Fr.
Teodoro Garcia and petitioner Trinidad Neyra and several others were
also present.

On November 4, 1942, the testatrix Encarnacion Neyra, due to a heart ‘attack, unexpectedly died.

Although the “Congregation de Religiosas de la Virgen Maria” had
again decided not to accept the provision made in its favor by the
testatrix Encarnacion Neyra in the proposed codicil prepared by Atty.
Ricardo Sikat, said de­cision could not be communicated to the
testatrix, before her death.

Mons. Vicente Fernandez and Fr. Teodovo Garcia testified as to the
request made on October 31, 1942, by Encarnacion Neyra for the
celebration of holy mass in her house, on November 1, 1942;
that said mass was in fact solemnized in her house, on that date, in the
course of which the testatrix Encarnacion Neyra took holy communion;
that on the same day, after the mass, Encarnacion held a long
conversation with Father Garcia, in the course of which, said priest
advised her to have reconciliation with her sister Trinidad; and that
said advice was accepted by Encarnacion.

By the testimony of Trinidad Neyra, it has been shown that
Encarnacion sent Eustaquio Mendoza to fetch her, and that in fact she
came to the house of Encarnacion, at about 2.30 o’clock in the afternoon
that same day, November 1, 1942, with said Eustaquio Mendoza; that on
seeing one another, Encarnacion and Trinidad Neyra greeted each other
most affectionately, forgiving one another, after which they talked
about the property left by their deceased father and the litigation
pending between them; and the two sisters agreed to settle their case,
which had been elevated to the Court of Appeals for the City of Manila,
concerning a certain house and lot, on the understanding that said
property should be given exclusively to Trinidad, and that the latter
should renounce her claim against Encarnacion, for her share in the
rents collected on said property, and, at the same time, Encarnacion
renounced her claim for P727.77 against Trinidad; and that it was also
agreed between the two sisters that Atty. Alejandro M. Panis should be
called to prepare the necessary papers for the settlement of said case.
Presentacion Blanco, a witness for the oppositors, also testified
substantially to the foregoing facts.

By the testimony of Trinidad Neyra and Atty. Alejandro M. Panis,
and the other attesting witnesses, it has also been shown that Atty.
Alejandro M. Panis came in the afternoon of the following day, November
2, 1942, and received instructions from Encarnacion Neyra, not only for
the preparation of said agreement, but also for the preparation of a new
will, and consequently Attorney Panis prepared said document of
compromise and the Mall, dated November 3, 1942, which were both thumb
marked, in duplicate, in the afternoon of that day, by Encarnacion
Neyra, who was then of sound mind, as shown by her appearance and
conversation, aided by a son of Trinidad Neyra, on her” bed in the sala, in
the presence of the attesting witnesses, Dr. Moises B. Abad, Dr. Eladio
R. Aldecoa, and Atty. Ale­ jandro M. Panis, who signed in the presence
of the testatrix and of each other.

Father Teodoro Garcia was also present at the signing of the will,
at the request of Encaimacion Neyra, and so was Trinidad Neyra.

On November 4, 1942, due to a heart attack as a con­ sequence of
Addison’s disease, perhaps, Encarnacion Neyra expired, at about 3
o’clock in the morning.

Oppositor Teodora Neyra, her young daughter Ceferina de
la Cruz, and Presentacion Blanco, daughter of oppositor Maria Jacobo
Vda. de Blanco, practically corroborated the testimony of the witnesses
of the petitioner, with reference to the signing of documents, in the
bedroom of Encarnacion Neyra, on November 3, 1942.

Teodora Neyra, Presentacion Blanco and Ceferina de la Cruz,
witnesses for the oppositors, testified, however, that when the thumb
mark of Encarnacion Neyra was affixed, as stated above, to the document
of compromise in question, dated November 3, 1942, she was sleeping on
her bed in the sola; and that the attesting witnesses” were not present, as they were in the caida.

But Ceferina de la Cruz, witness for the oppositors, also stated
that the attesting witnesses signed the documents thumb marked by
Encarnacion Neyra, in the sola near her bed, thus contradicting herself and Teodora Neyra and Presentacion Blanco.

Strange to say, Teodora Neyra, Presentacion Blanco and Ceferina de
la Cruz also testified that Encarnacion Neyra’s thumb mark was affixed
to the will, only in the morning of November 4, 1942, by Trinidad Neyra
and Ildefonso del Barrio, when Encarnacion was already dead.

The testimony of Dr. Dionisio Parulan, alleged medical expert, as
to the nature and effects of Addison’s disease, is absolutely
unreliable. He had never seen or talked to the testatrix Encarnacion
Neyra.

According to medical authorities, the cause or causes of the
sleeping sickness, known as Addison’s disease, are not yet fully known;
that persons attacked by said disease often live as long as ten (10)
years after the first attack, while others die after a few weeks only,
and that as the disease progresses, asthenia sets in, and from 80 per
cent to 90 per cent of the patients develop tuberculosis, and
complications of the heart also appear. (Cecil, Textbook of Medicine, 3d
ed., 1935, pp. 1250, 1252, 1253; MaCrae, Osier’s Modem Medicine, 3d
ed., Vol. V. pp. 272-279).

And it has been conclusively shown in this case that the testatrix
Encarnacion Neyra, at the age of 48, died on November 4, 1942, due to a
heart attack, after an illness of about two (2) years.

In connection with testamentary capacity, in several cases, this
court has considered the testimony of witnes­ses, who had known and
talked to the testators, more trustworthy than the testimony of alleged
medical experts.

Testamentary capacity is 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. (Bugnao vs. Ubag, 14 Phil., 163.)

Insomnia, in spite of the testimony of two doctors who testified
for the opponents to the probate of a will, who stated that it tended to
destroy mental capacity, was held not to affect the full possession of
the mental faculties deemed necessary and sufficient for its execution.
(Caguioa vs. Calderon, 20 Phil., 400.) The testatrix was held to have been compos mentis, in
spite of the physican’s testimony to the contrary, to the effect that
she was very weak, being in the third or last stage of tuberculosis.
(Yap Tua vs. Yap Ca Kuan and Yap Ca Liu, 27 Phil., 579.) The
testimony of the attending physician that the deceased was suffering
from diabetes and had been in a comatose condition for several days,
prior to his death, was held not sufficient to establish testamentary
incapacity, in view of the positive statement of several credible
witnesses that he was conscious and able to understand what said to him
and to communicate his desires. (Samson vs. Corrales Tan
Quintin, 44 Phil., 573.) Where the mind of the testator is in perfectly
sound condition, neither old age, nor ill health, nor the fact that
somebody had to guide his hand in order that he might sign, is
sufficient to invalidate his will. (Amata and Almojuela vs. Tablizo, 48 Phil., 485.)

Where it appears that a few hours and also a few days
after the execution of the will, the testator intelligently and
intelligibly conversed with other persons, although lying down and
unable to move or stand up unassisted, but could still effect the sale
of property belonging to him, these circumstances show that the testator
was in a perfectly sound mental condition at the time of executing the
will. (Amata and Almojuela vs. Tablizo, 48 Phil., 485.)

Presentacion Blanco, in the course of her cross-examination,
frankly admitted that, in the morning and also at about 6 o’clock in the
afternoon of November 3, 1942, Encarnacion Neyra talked to her and that
they understood each other clearly, thus showing that the testatrix was
really of sound mind, at the time of the signing and execution of the
agreement and will in question.

It may, therefore, be reasonably concluded that the mental
faculties of persons suffering from Addison’s disease, like the
testatrix in this case, remain unimpaired, partly due to the fact that,
on account of the sleep they enjoy, they necessarily receive the benefit
of physical and mental rest. And that like patients suffering from
tuberculosis, insomnia or diabetes, they preserve their mental faculties
until the moments of their death.

Judging by the authorities above cited, the conclusion made by the
trial court that the testatrix Encarnacion Neyra was of sound mind and
possessed testamentary capacity, at the time of the execution of the
will, cannot be properly disturbed.

The oppositors also claim that the attesting witnesses were not
present, at the time that the testatrix thumb marked the will in
question, on her bed, in the sola of the house, as they were allegedly in the cadda. But
it has been fully, shown that the attesting witnesses were present at
the time of the signing and execution of the agreement and will in
question, in the sala, where the testatrix was lying on her
bed. The true test is not whether they actually saw each other, at the
time of the signing of the will, but whether they might have seen each
other sign, had they chosen to do so; and the attesting witnesses
actually saw it in this case. (Jaboneta vs. Gustilo, 5 Phil., 541.) And the thnmbmark placed by the testatrix on the will is equivalent to her signature. (Yap Tua vs. Yap Ca Kuan and Yap Ca Liu, 27 Phil., 579.)

The oppositors as well as their principal witnesses are all
interested parties, as said oppositors had been named legatees in the
will dated September 14, 1939, but elim­inated from the will dated
November 3, 1942.

On the other hand, the witnesses for the petitioner are all
trustworthy men, who had absolutely no interest in the final outcome of
this case. Two of them are ministers of the Gospel, while the three
attesting witnesses are profes­sional men of irreproachable character,
who had known and seen and talked to the testatrix.

Furthermore, the testimony of the oppositors and their witnesses,
to the effect that there could have been no reconciliation between the
two sisters, and that the thumb mark of Encarnacion Neyra was affixed to
the document embodying the agreement, while she was sleeping, on
November 3, ]942, in their presence; and that her thumb mark was affixed
to the will in question, when she was already dead, in the morning of
November 4, 1942, within their view, is preposterous, to say the least.
Said testimony is contrary to common sense. It violates all sense of
proportion. The oppositors and their witnesses could not have told the
truth; they have testified to brazen falsehoods ; and they are,
therefore, absolutely unworthy of belief. And to the evidence of the
oppositors is completely applicable the rule falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus. (Gonzalez vs. Mauricio, 53 Phil., 728, 735.)

In the brief presented by counsel for the oppositors and
appellants, to show the alleged improbability of the reconciliation of
the two sisters and the execution of the will, dated November 3, 1942,
they have erroneously placed great reliance on the fact that, up to
October 31, 1942, the two sisters Encarnacion and Trinidad Neyra were
bitter enemies. They were banking evidently on the common belief that
the hatred of relatives is the most violent. Dreadful indeed are the
feuds of relatives, and difficult the reconciliation. But they had
forgotten the fact that Encarnacion Neyra was a religious and pious
woman instructed in the ancient virtues of Christian faith and hope and
charity, and that it was godly to forgive and better still to forget.

It was most natural that there should have been reconciliation
between the two sisters, Encarnacion and Trinidad Neyra, as the latter
is the nearest relative of the former, her only sister of the whole
blood. The approach of imminent death must have evoked in her the
tenderest recollections of childhood. And believing perhaps that her
little triumphs had not always brought her happiness, and that she had
not always been fair to her sister, who, in fact, had successively
instituted two suits against her, to recover what was her due, and for
which Encarnacion believed she must atone, she finally decided upon
reconciliation, so that she might depart in peace.

The record shows that, of the two, Encarnacion lived in greater
opulence, and that Trinidad had been demanding tenaciously her share;
and as a Christian woman, Encar­ nacion must have known that no one has
any right to enrich himself unjustly, at the expense of another. And it
was, therefore, natural that Encarnacion should desire reconciliation
with her sister Trinidad, and provide for her in her last will and
testament.

As for Eustaquio Mendoza, who, according to the evidence, had
served Encarnacion Neyra for so many years and so well, it was also
natural that she should make some provision for him, as gratitude is the
noblest sentiment that springs from the human heart.

The conduct of Encarnacion Neyra, in making altogether a new will,
with new beneficiaries named therein, including principally her
bitterest enemy of late, which is completely incompatible with the will,
dated September 14, 1939, may really seem strange and unusual; but, as
it has been truly said, above the logic of the head is the feeling in
the heart, and the heart has reasons of its own which the head cannot
always understand, as in the case of intuitive knowledge of eternal
verity.

As Encarnacion Neyra felt the advent of immortality, she naturally
wanted to follow “the path of the just, which is as the shining light
that shineth more and more unto the perfect day,” so that her memory may
be blessed. As a Christian woman, she must have loved justice, mercy
and truth and to follow the law, for this is the whole duty of man.

In the present case, the court cannot find any reason or
justification to alter the conclusions set forth in the decree appealed
from. This court will not reverse any findings of fact by the trial
court made upon conflicting testimony and depending largely upon the
credibility of witnesses, who testified in the presence of the trial
judge, unless the court below failed to take into consideration some
material facts or circumstances, or to weigh accurately all of the
material facts and circumstances presented to it for consideration.
(Baltazar vs. Alberto, 33 Phil., 336; Melliza vs. Towle, 34 Phil., 345; Caragay vs. Urquiza, 53 Phil., 72, 79; Garcia vs. Garcia de Bartolome, 63 Phil, 419.)

After a careful consideration of the evidence and the law in this
case, we find it legally impossible to sustain any of the errors
assigned by the appellants. The judgment appealed from is, therefore,
affirmed, with costs against the appellants. So ordered.

Ozaeta, Perfecto, Hilado, and Bengzon, J.J., concur.
Judgment affirmed.