Lim vs. Chinco
Lim vs. Chinco
Lim vs. Chinco
JULIANA CHINCO,
G.R. No. 33592. March 31, 1931
2. The parties in this case are Eusebia Lim (petitioner- appellant), a collateral relative to whom the
document produced as the testator’s will purports to leave the testator’s estate, consisting of properties
valued at 50,000 more or less to her, together with two other collateral relatives. Juliano Chino is the
oppositor- appellee who is a full sister of the deceased.
The deceased was a resident of Meycauayan, Bulacan, and was about 80 years of age at the
time of her death.
June 2, 1929- she was stricken with apoplexy, incident to cerebral hemorrhage, and was taken in an
unconscious condition. Doctor Gaanan, a local physician of Meycauayan, visited the old lady, with whom
he was well acquainted, three or four times. Upon examining the patient, he found her insensible and
incapable of talking or controlling her movements.
Doctor Isidoro Lim, of Manila, was also called upon to visit the patient and he came to see her two or
three times. With his approval, it was decided to take the woman to the hospital of San Juan de Dios in
Manila.
June 5, 1929- the ambulance from this hospital arrived, in charge of Doctor Guillermo Lopez del Castillo,
a resident physician of the hospital. At about 11 o'clock a.m. on that day she was embarked on the
ambulance andtaken to the hospital, where she died four days later.
The purported will, was prepared by Perfecto Gabriel, a practicing attorney of Manila, whose wife
appears to be related to the chief beneEciaries named in the will. He arrived at the scene at 9 or 10
o'clock on the forenoon of June 5, 1929. The purported will was made during this time before the
deceased was taken to the hospital.
3.The trial court disallowed the will for reasons that the supposed testatrix had no testamentary
capacity at the time the paper referred to was signed. The proof shows by a marked preponderance that
the deceased, on the morning of June 5, 1929, was in a comatose condition and incapable of performing
any conscious and valid act.
4. But Doctor Lim, one of the three doctorsthat examined the deceased testiEed for the proponent of
the will. His testimony tends to show that the patient was not suffering from cerebral hemorrhage but
from uraemic trouble, and that, after the firrst attack, the patient was much relieved and her mind so
far cleared up that she might have made a will on the morning of June 5 th.
5. The Supreme Court ruled that e supposed testatrix had no testamentary capacity at the time the
paper referred to was signed. The proof shows by a marked preponderance that the deceased, on the
morning of June 5, 1929, was in a comatose condition and incapable of performing any conscious and
valid act. The testimony ofDoctor Gaanan and Doctor Lopez del Castillo is suHcient, and this testimony is
well corroborated by Paciana Diaz and Irene Ahorro. The Erst of these
witnesses was the one who chieBy cared for the deceased during her last illness in
Meycauayan until she was carried away to the hospital in Manila; and the second was a
neighbor, who was called in when the stroke of apoplexy Erst occurred and who visited
the patient daily until she was removed from Meycauayan.
The testimony of these witnesses is convincing to the effect that the patient was
in a continuous state of coma during the entire period of her stay in Meycauayan,
subsequent to the attack, and that on the forenoon of June 5, 1929, she did not have
suHcient command of her faculties to enable her to do any valid act. The attorney
testiEed that he was able to communicate with the deceased when the will was made,
and that he read the instrument over to her clause by clause and asked her whether it
expressed her wishes. He says that she made signs that enabled him to understand
that she concurred in what was written. But it is clear, even upon the statement of this
witness, that the patient was unable to utter intelligent speech. The paper offered for probate was
properly disallowed