G.R. No. 30574, January 23, 1929
IRINEO D. AVIADO, petitioner-appellant, vs. TEODORO TALENS, ET AL., respondents. TEODORO TALENS, appellant.

FACTS

In the municipal election for President of San Isidro, Nueva Ecija held on June 5, 1928, the municipal board of canvassers proclaimed Teodoro Talens (contestee) as the elected candidate, having received 282 votes against Ireneo D. Aviado’s (contestant) 287 votes. Aviado filed an election protest in the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija. The trial court, after a revision of ballots, declared Aviado the winner by a margin of 7 votes and ordered the municipal council to take note of the decision. Talens appealed the decision, assigning errors in the trial court’s appreciation of about 32 ballots.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in its appreciation of the contested ballots, particularly those containing votes for non-candidates or for more candidates than the number to be elected for an office, and other alleged irregularities.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the trial court’s decision. The Court held that the trial judge correctly appreciated the contested ballots. The key rulings are:

1. Votes for Non-Candidates or Excess Votes Do Not Invalidate the Entire Ballot: The Court noted that the previous provision in Section 452 of the Election Law (Act No. 3210), which invalidated a ballot for voting for a non-candidate, had been repealed by Act No. 3387. The omission of this provision indicated the Legislature’s intent that a vote for a valid candidate should not be invalidated merely because the voter also wrote in names of non-candidates for other offices. This principle also applies to ballots where more persons are voted for a single office than the number to be elected.

2. Such Ballots Are Not Considered “Marked”: The circumstance that a person who is not a candidate is voted for is not, by itself, sufficient to characterize the ballot as “marked” for purposes of identification and invalidation.

3. Use of Descriptive Titles Like “Senator” is Not Fatal: Writing a descriptive title (e.g., “Senator”) before a candidate’s name, due to the voter’s lack of skill, does not make the ballot marked or invalid.

4. Ballot Found in the Spoiled Ballots Box Can Be Counted: The Court upheld the trial court’s admission of a valid ballot (C-116) found in the box for spoiled ballots, given the discrepancy between the election returns and the actual count of ballots in the boxes, and the surrounding circumstances indicating it was a valid vote.

5. Illegible or Inartfully Written Names Can Be Counted: Ballots where the candidate’s name, though inartfully written, is intelligible and the voter’s intent to vote for the contestant is clear, are valid. This includes ballots where the voter wrote the first name after the surname.

6. Name Written in the Wrong Space Cannot Be Counted: If a candidate’s name is clearly written in the space reserved for a different office (e.g., Talens’s name written in the space for Vice-President), the vote cannot be counted for the office for which he was actually a candidate.

The Supreme Court found no merit in the appellant’s assignments of error and affirmed the judgment declaring Ireneo D. Aviado the duly elected Municipal President of San Isidro, Nueva Ecija.