G.R. No. L-5971 / February 27, 1911
BEATRIZ NERA, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellees, vs. NARCISA RIMANDO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The case involves the probate of the will of Pedro Rimando. The central factual dispute is whether one of the subscribing witnesses was present in the same room when the testator and the other witnesses signed the will. The appellant contended that this witness was in an outer room, separated by a doorway with a curtain, about eight to ten feet away, making it impossible to see the signing. The trial court admitted the will to probate, relying on the doctrine in Jaboneta vs. Gustilo that actual sight is not required if the parties could have seen each other sign if they chose to do so.

ISSUE

Whether the will was executed in the presence of all subscribing witnesses as required by law, specifically, if a witness was outside the room and unable to see the signing due to a physical obstruction (a curtain).

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the trial court’s decree admitting the will to probate. A majority found that the subscribing witness was indeed inside the small room with the testator and other witnesses at the time of signing. However, the Court clarified the legal standard: had the witness been in the outer room, the will would have been invalid. The curtain would have impeded the line of vision “at the moment of inscription of each signature,” meaning the witness could not have seen the signing even if they chose to, without changing positions. The Court upheld the Jaboneta testthat the parties must be in such positions that they could have seen each other sign by merely casting their eyes, with no physical obstructionbut emphasized this requires the possibility of mutual observation at the exact moment of signing under existing conditions. The will was validly executed as all witnesses were present.