In the Matter of the Petition to Approved

the Will of Leodegaria Julian, Felix Balanay Jr. vs.

Hon. Antonio M. Martinez Judge of the
Court of First Instance of Davao, Avelina Antonio
G.R. No. L-39247June 27, 1975
Digested by: ARIES S. DE LUNA

Facts: Leodegaria died on February 12, 1973, she was survived by her husband and their six
children. Felix Jr. filed with the Court of First Instance of Davao for the probate of his mothers
will. In the will it was sated that; [i] Leodegaria is the owner of the southern part of nine conjugal
property, [ii] she is the absolute owner of two parcels of land which she inherited from her father,
[iii] that her property shall not be divided during her husbands life time, and that the legitimes od
her children shall be satisfied out of the fruits of her property, [iv] that after the death of her
husband her property shall be divided among their six children. Felix Sr. and Avelina Antonio
opposed the probate proceedings on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence
and preterition of the husband. On reply to the opposition, Felix Jr. attached and affidavit of his
father Felix Sr. and Confirmation and Renunciation and waiver of his hereditary rights. Antonia,
however, alleged that the affidavit and confirmation were void. During the trial of the case, another
lawyer of Felix Jr. filed with the court for the withdrawal of the probate proceedings and
converting the case into intestate proceedings. The court granted it. Felix Jr. filed Motion for
Reconsideration but the court denied it.

Issue: Whether the will is intrinsically void because of some invalid provisions and preterition of
the husband in the will.

Held: The general rule is that the invalidity of one of several dispositions contained in a will does
not result in the invalidity if the other dispositions, unless it is to be presumed that the testator
would not have made such other dispositions if the first place invalid disposition had not been
made. Where some of the provisions of a will are valid and others invalid, the valid part will be
upheld if they can be separated from the invalid without defeating the intention of the testator or
interfering with the general testamentary scheme. As to the preterition of the husband, the court
said that there was no preterition because the husband is not considered as compulsory heir in the
direct line. The mere fact that Felix Sr. executed a confirmation and renunciation of his hereditary
rights it is a clear showing that the spouse really intended that their conjugal property be distribted
among their six children.