Art. 916; Art. 810Seangio v Reyes FactsThere was a petitionfor theprobateof anallege holographicwill which waseno!inate as"#as$latan sa pag%aalisng !ana.& The privateresponents !ove forthe is!issal of theprobate proceeingspri!arily on thegro$n that theoc$!ent p$rportingtobetheholographicwill of Seg$no i notcontain any ispositionof the estate of theecease an th$s inot !eet the e'nitionof awill $ner Article(8)of the*ivil *oe.Accoring to privateresponents+ the willonly showe anallege act ofisinheritance by theeceent of hiselestson+ Alfreo+ annothing else; that allother co!p$lsory heirswere not na!e norinstit$te as heir+evisee or legatee+hence there waspreterition whichwo$l res$lt tointestacy. S$ch beingthe case+ privateresponents!aintaine that whileproce$rallytheco$rtiscalle$pontor$leonly on the e,trinsicvaliity of the will+ it isnot barre fro!elving into theintrinsic valiity of thesa!e+ an orering theis!issal of thepetition for probatewhen on the face of-ss$e1. .hether theoc$!ent e,ec$te bySeg$no can beconsiere as aholographic will./..on there ispreterition0el12S1. A holographic will+as provie $nerArticle 810 of the *ivil*oe+ !$st be entirelywritten+ ate+ ansignebythehanofthetestatorhi!self. -tiss$b3ect tonootherfor!+ an !ay be!aeinoro$tof the4hilippines+ an neenot be witnesse.Seg$no5s oc$!ent+altho$gh it !ayinitially co!e across asa !ere isinheritanceinstr$!ent+ confor!stothefor!alitiesof aholographic willprescribe by law. -t iswritten+ ate ansignebythehanofSeg$no hi!self. Anintent toispose mortiscausa[9] can be clearlye$ce fro! theter!s of theinstr$!ent+ an whileit oes not !a6e ana7r!ative ispositionof the latter5s property+the isinheritance ofAlfreo+ nonetheless+ isan act of isposition initself. -n other wors+the isinheritanceres$lts in theisposition of theproperty of thetestator Seg$no infavor of those whowo$l s$ccee in theabsence of Alfreo.108oreover+ it is af$na!ental principlethat theintent or thethewillitisclear thatit contains notesta!entaryisposition of theproperty of theeceent. 4etitioners'le their opposition tothe!otiontois!isscontening that9 :1;generally+ thea$thority of theprobate co$rt is li!iteonly to a eter!inationof the e,trinsic valiityof thewill; :/; privateresponents e asthe s$pre!e law ins$ccession. All r$les ofconstr$ction areesigne to ascertainan give e?ect to thatintention. -t is onlywhentheintentionofthe testator is contraryto law+ !orals+ orp$blic policy that itcannot be givene?ect.11/..ith regar to theiss$e onpreterition+1@ the *o$rtbelieves that theco!p$lsory heirs inthe irect line were notpreterite in the will. -twas+ in the *o$rt5sopinion+ Seg$no5s laste,pression tobe