Molo v. Molo

Summary

This probate case involved competing wills of Mariano Molo y Legaspi executed in 1918 and 1939. After the 1939 will was denied probate despite containing a revocatory clause, the deceased's widow sought probate of the earlier 1918 will. The Supreme Court affirmed the probate, applying the Samson vs. Naval doctrine that a revocatory clause in an invalid subsequent will cannot revoke a prior will. The Court rejected arguments of estoppel and bad faith against the widow, finding no evidence of deliberate destruction of the original 1918 will by the testator. Even assuming destruction occurred, the Court applied the doctrine of dependent relative revocation, reasoning that any destruction was based on the mistaken belief that the 1939 will was valid. The case establishes important precedent on will revocation and probate procedure in Philippine law.