In short
Some legacies point to no particular thing: “a car”, “a property”, without saying which. Article 1700 resolves them, and does so by treating movables and immovables in opposite ways. The legacy of a generic movable is valid even if there are no goods of its kind in the inheritance: if you were left a car and the deceased had none, the legacy stands and one must be obtained for you. The legacy of an undetermined immovable is valid only if there is one of its kind in the inheritance: if you were left a property and the estate holds no land, there is no legacy. That is the line, and no other is drawn here. The same article adds who decides: the choice belongs to the heir, who complies by giving a good of similar quality to what was legated. You do not choose, and what you are owed is not the best in the estate but one of quality similar to what the will described. One detail about where that sentence sits is worth flagging: in the text the OGP publishes, “the choice belongs to the heir” appears in the immovable paragraph, after its rule, and is not repeated for movables. Where the sentence sits is stated here, and whether it reaches the first paragraph too is not decided. Article 1701 closes by pointing outward: when the legacy is generic or alternative, the rules on generic or alternative obligations apply, except for the modifications derived from the testator’s express will. Those rules live in the Book on obligations — the alternative ones have their own guide on this site —; they were not re-read for this batch, so the reference is named here and what lies behind it is not described.
What is it?
They are Articles 1700 and 1701 of the Civil Code of 2020: when a legacy pointing at no particular thing holds, the difference between movable and immovable, who chooses, and what rules apply suppletorily.
Who can do it?
Any legatee left a good without saying which, and any heir who must choose.
Requirements
- The legacy of a generic movable is valid even if there are no goods of its kind in the inheritance.Verified against the official source
- The legacy of an undetermined immovable is valid only if there is one of its kind in the inheritance.Verified against the official source
- The choice belongs to the heir.Verified against the official source
- The heir complies by giving a good of similar quality to what was legated.Verified against the official source
- Generic or alternative legacies are governed by the rules on generic or alternative obligations, except for the testator’s express will.Verified against the official source
Documents you need
Cost
Step by step
Step 1: Check whether it is movable or immovable
Article 1700: whether the legacy exists at all when the estate holds none of that kind depends on it.
Step 2: The movable holds even if there is none
The legacy of a generic movable is valid even if there are no goods of its kind in the inheritance.
Step 3: The immovable, only if there is one
The legacy of an undetermined immovable is valid only if there is one of its kind in the inheritance.
Step 4: The heir chooses, not you
The same article: the choice belongs to the heir.
Step 5: And complies with similar quality
They comply by giving a good of similar quality to what was legated. Neither the best in the estate nor the worst.
Step 6: Where that sentence sits
In the OGP text it appears in the immovable paragraph and is not repeated for movables. That is flagged here and not decided.
Step 7: If it is generic or alternative
Article 1701: the rules on generic or alternative obligations apply, except for the testator’s express will.
Where to do it
These two articles describe no procedure before any agency. The Code does not say here what makes a good “generic” or “undetermined”, what “similar quality” is or who judges it, what happens if the heir will not choose or how long they have, nor who pays to obtain the movable the estate lacks. None of those gaps is filled here. The rules on generic and alternative obligations that Article 1701 refers to have their own guide on this site and were not re-read for this batch.
How long it takes
What to do if something goes wrong
If the will leaves you “a car” or “a property” without saying which, first check what kind of thing it is, because Article 1700 treats them as opposites. With a generic movable you are covered even if the estate has none: the legacy is valid all the same. With an undetermined immovable, no: if the estate holds no good of that kind, the legacy does not hold. It sounds harsh and that is how it is written. Second is who chooses, and the answer is rarely popular: the heir chooses. What you may demand is that what is chosen be of similar quality to what was legated, not that it be the best available. What “similar quality” means the article does not say, nor who judges it if you disagree, and no test is invented here. Nor does it say how long the heir has to choose, what happens if they simply do not, or who pays to go buy the movable the estate lacks. If your legacy was alternative — “either the car or the boat” — Article 1701 refers to the rules on alternative obligations, which live in Book Four and have their own guide here; we did not re-read them for this batch, so this guide only names the reference. MiPRFácil does not represent anyone in court and gives no legal advice.
Common mistakes
- Treating generic movables and immovables alike: Article 1700 resolves them as opposites.
- Giving up a movable legacy because the estate has none: it is valid all the same.
- Counting on an undetermined immovable legacy without checking for land in the estate: it holds only if there is.
- Believing the legatee chooses: the choice belongs to the heir.
- Demanding the best good in the estate: the heir complies with one of similar quality to what was legated.
- Taking “similar quality” as defined: the article uses it and does not explain it.
- Expecting a deadline for the heir to choose: the article sets none.
- Looking in Article 1701 for the substantive rules: it refers to generic or alternative obligations.
Frequently asked questions
I was left “a car” and there was none. Do I lose the legacy?
No. Article 1700 says the legacy of a generic movable is valid even if there are no goods of its kind in the inheritance.
And if I was left “a property” and there is none?
The same article says the legacy of an undetermined immovable is valid only if there is one of its kind in the inheritance.
Who chooses which one I get?
Article 1700 says the choice belongs to the heir, who complies by giving a good of similar quality to what was legated.
What rules govern an alternative legacy?
Article 1701 applies the rules on generic or alternative obligations, except for modifications derived from the testator’s express will.
Official sources
These are the government pages this guide is based on.
- Poder Judicial de Puerto Rico
Poder Judicial
bvirtualogp.pr.gov
Last verified
September 12, 2026
MiPRFácil is an independent informational website and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the Government of Puerto Rico or any government agency.
MiPRFácil does not submit applications on your behalf.
Was this guide helpful?
Did you find out-of-date information?
A legacy must be asked for: you cannot take the thing on your own
Article 1691 of the Civil Code of 2020 makes the legatee ask the heir or albacea for delivery, and 1692 forbids substituting the thing.
Left something that was not theirs: valid if the testator knew, and proving it is on you
Article 1693 of the Civil Code of 2020 puts the burden of proof on the legatee, and 1695 leaves the mortgage on the legated thing to them.
One thing or another is owed: who chooses and when it is fixed
The choice is the debtor’s unless given to someone else, and it only takes effect once notified. Once notified, it stops being alternative.
How to make a will in Puerto Rico
The 2020 Civil Code’s kinds of will, who may execute one, and the rule that changed: with forced heirs you may freely dispose of half.
A will that names no heirs is still valid
Article 1660 of the Civil Code of 2020 says so in one sentence, and 1663 splits in equal parts when no shares were set.
If the will contradicts itself, the dividing clause wins; in a separate act, it loses
Article 1778 of the Civil Code of 2020 reverses the rule depending on where the partition was written: inside the will or in a separate act.