The “Dead Man’s Statute” provides that if one
party to the alleged transaction is precluded from testifying by death,
insanity, or other mental disabilities, the surviving party is not entitled to
the undue advantage of giving his own uncontradicted and unexplained account of
the transaction. But before this rule can be successfully invoked to bar the
introduction of testimonial evidence, it is necessary that: 1. The witness
is a party or assignor of a party to a case or persons in whose behalf a case
is prosecuted; 2. The action is against an executor or administrator
or other representative of a deceased person or a person of unsound mind; 3. The subject-matter of
the action is a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or
against person of unsound mind; and 4. His
testimony refers to any matter of fact which occurred before the death of such
deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind.” Well entrenched
is the rule that when it is the executor or administrator or representatives of
the estate that sets up the counterclaim, the plaintiff, herein respondent, may
testify to occurrences before the death of the deceased to defeat the
counterclaim. Moreover, as defendant in the counterclaim, respondent is not
disqualified from testifying as to matters of fact occurring before the death
of the deceased, said action not having been brought against but by the estate
or representatives of the deceased. (Sunga-Chan
vs. Chua, G.R. No. 143340, August 15, 2001, Gonzaga-Reyes, J.).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.