Forgery; Handwriting Experts; Judge Must Conduct An Independent Examination Of The Questioned Signature

See - A Finding Of Forgery Does Not Depend Entirely On The Testimonies Of Handwriting Experts, Because The Judge Must Conduct An Independent Examination Of The Questioned Signature In Order To Arrive At A Reasonable Conclusion As To Its Authenticity.⁠.. - The Lawyer's Post





"x x x.

The opinion of handwriting experts are not necessarily binding upon the court, the expert’s function being to place before the court data upon which the court can form its own opinion⁠12.  This principle holds true especially when the question involved is mere handwriting similarity or dissimilarity, which can be determined by a visual comparison of specimens of the questioned signatures with those of the currently existing ones.⁠13  A finding of forgery does not depend entirely on the testimonies of handwriting experts, because the judge must conduct an independent examination of the questioned signature in order to arrive at a reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity.⁠14 

Here, both the RTC and CA found that Albacea did not explain the manner of examination of the specimen signatures in reaching his conclusion. Albacea did not point out distinguishing marks, characteristics and discrepancies in and between genuine and false specimens of writing which would ordinarily escape notice or detection by an untrained observer. The Court also aptly ruled that courts are not bound by expert testimonies especially that the examination was upon the initiative of Nick and Betty and they had complete control on what documents and specimens to be examined by the NBI. Betty, in coming before us, had the onus of showing that the signatures were forged. She fell short of demonstrating that her case fell within the limited exceptions for disturbing conclusiveness of factual findings of lower courts.

x x x."

G.R. No. 200013, January 14, 2015, BETTY GEPULLE-GARBO, REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, MINDA G. ROSALES(NOW REPRESENTED BY HER NEW ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, GARY LLOYD G. ROSALES), PETITIONER, VS. SPOUSES VICTOREY ANTONIO GARABATO AND JOSEPHINE S. GARABATO, RESPONDENTS.