Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 159 views

    Facturan vs. Sabanal

    Uploaded by

    May RM
    The Supreme Court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration. It upheld the Court of Appeals' decision to reverse the trial court's ruling striking corroborating testimonies from witnesses for the appellant. Even without this evidence, the widow's testimony that the property was acquired during marriage was sufficient to presume it was part of the marital estate, and there was not sufficient evidence to overcome this presumption. Additionally, the statute of frauds did not apply to this case regarding an executed contract for property acquired during the marriage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Facturan vs. Sabanal

    Uploaded by

    May RM
    159 views1 page
    The Supreme Court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration. It upheld the Court of Appeals' decision to reverse the trial court's ruling striking corroborating testimonies from witnesses for the appellant. Even without this evidence, the widow's testimony that the property was acquired during marriage was sufficient to presume it was part of the marital estate, and there was not sufficient evidence to overcome this presumption. Additionally, the statute of frauds did not apply to this case regarding an executed contract for property acquired during the marriage.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration. It upheld the Court of Appeals' decision to reverse the trial court's ruling striking corroborating testimonies from witnesses for the appellant. Even without this evidence, the widow's testimony that the property was acquired during marriage was sufficient to presume it was part of the marital estate, and there was not sufficient evidence to overcome this presumption. Additionally, the statute of frauds did not apply to this case regarding an executed contract for property acquired during the marriage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    159 views1 page

    Facturan vs. Sabanal

    Uploaded by

    May RM
    The Supreme Court denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration. It upheld the Court of Appeals' decision to reverse the trial court's ruling striking corroborating testimonies from witnesses for the appellant. Even without this evidence, the widow's testimony that the property was acquired during marriage was sufficient to presume it was part of the marital estate, and there was not sufficient evidence to overcome this presumption. Additionally, the statute of frauds did not apply to this case regarding an executed contract for property acquired during the marriage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    Facturan vs.

    Sabanal

    RULING: Contrary to petitioner's contention, the transcription of stenographer notes


    attached to the record of the case elevated to this Court shows that exceptions were
    expressly taken from the trial court's orders striking out the corroborative testimonies of
    witnesses for appellant. Under the last assignment of error such ruling might and it is to
    be presumed to have been discussed on appeal as erroneous (appellant's brief not
    being attached to the reconstituted record), because of the legal presumption that the
    Court of Appeals, in considering said testimonies , acted in accordance with law.

    Even disregarding such corroborative evidence, widow's own testimony to the effect that
    the property was acquired during marriage, even if uncorroborated by other evidence, is
    a sufficient basis for the legal presumption that the property in question is conjugal,
    there being no sufficient evidence to destroy said presumption according to the
    conclusion of the Court of Appeals, which cannot be disturbed by this Court.

    Assuming that said testimonies were the only evidence on the acquisition of the
    property in question during marriage, and disregarding the widow's testimony, the
    question of law; whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the rulings of the
    lower court that ordered that the corroborative testimony of witnesses for appellant be
    stricken out, is unsubstantial, for it is very obvious that said decision is in accord with
    law, because the statute of frauds on which the ruling of the Court of First Instance is
    based "is not applicable in actions which are neither for a violation of contract nor for the
    performance thereof," (III Moran on Evidence, 165), and the action at bar is not such
    kind of action. And besides the statute of frauds is applicable only to executory
    contracts and not to executed contracts such as the contract of sale of the property in
    question to the spouses during their marriage, testified to by the witnesses whose
    testimonies were stricken out by the erroneous ruling of the said Court of First Instance.

    Therefore the notion for reconsideration is denied.

    You might also like