Probative value of testimony of an expert witness

Tamani vs Salvador, GR 171497

A case of quieting of title

Salvador alleged that Tamani sold a parcel of land to him but the heirs of the latter contend that
the signature of their parents were forged and assailed the validity Deed of Absolute sale.

During trial, the signature of Demetrio Tamani appearing on the deed of sale and his standard
signatures were submitted for examination and comparison to the Questioned Documents
Division of the NBI. The NBI filed a report finding that the questioned and standard signatures
DEMETRIO TAMANI are WRITTEN by one and the same person.

Dissatisfied Tamanis asked for another examination of the signatures, this time submitting the
same to the PNP Crime Laboratory Service. The PNP report states that the questioned signature
xxx WERE WRITTEN BY TWO DIFFERENT PERSONS.

Confronted with conflicting testimonies from handwriting experts, the RTC gave more weight to
the PNP report and testimony of Sorra (PNP Crime Lab) because of her educational, professional
and work background. The RTC ruled in favor of Tamani

On appeal, the CA favored Salvador. The CA ruled that the RTC erred when it relied solely on
Sorras educational, professional and work background when it decided to give more credence to
the PNP report. The CA, after examining the questioned and standard signatures of Tamani
opined that the similarities of strokes are more prominent and pronounced than the
dissimilarities and the apparent dissimilarities are overshadowed by the striking similarities in
the questioned and the standard signatures.

ISSUE: WON the CA is correct in overturning the factual findings of the RTC

HELD: NO.

two expert witnesses with conflicting findings could have been avoided had respondents timely
objected to petitioners motion to have a second re-examination of Tamanis signature.
Respondents should have, therefore, objected to the second re-examination, as the RTC would
have likely sustained the motion. However, respondents never objected.

While credentials of an expert witness play a factor in the evidentiary and persuasive weight of
his testimony, the same cannot be the sole factor in determining its value. The CA was thus
correct when it declared that the judge must conduct his own independent examination of the
signatures under scrutiny.

However, after painstakingly reviewing the testimonies of the expert witnesses and the
documentary evidence at hand, this Court (SC) is more inclined to believe that the signature of
Tamani appearing on the Deed of Sale was forged as can be gleaned from the testimony of Sorra,
the document examiner from the PNP Crime Laboratory.

The value of the opinion of a handwriting expert depends not upon his mere statements of
whether a writing is genuine or false, but upon the assistance he may afford in pointing out
distinguishing marks, characteristics and discrepancies in and between genuine and false
specimens of writing which would ordinarily escape notice or detection from an unpracticed
observer. While admittedly this Court was unable to fully comprehend all the differences noted
by Sorra given that her testimony was fairly technical in nature and description, it would, however,
not be amiss to state that this Court has observed a good number of the differences noted by
her.

Lastly, while it was improper for the RTC to rely solely on Sorras credentials, her superior
credentials, compared to that of Albacea, give added value to her testimony.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is GRANTED.

SC found that the signatures were written by to different persons.