Wroth v. Norton

Citations

• 33 Tex. 192

Syllabus

<p>1. No safe-conclusion can be deduced from circumstantial evidence,-if it.be left reasonable to suppose that the circumstances themselves did not transpire.</p> <p>2. On a trial of the right of property levied on, the court below charged the jury that the plaintiff might prove his' case either by'direct evidence1 or “ by circumstantial evidence,—that is, by the proof of Such facte as Will naturally lead the mind- to that -conclusion, and will exclude any other reasonable inference.” Held, that the charge is not necessarily to be understood as requiring the plaintiff to make, out his case by circumstantial evidence of ’ so Conclusive a chat-actor as to admit of no reasona- • ble c'obclüsión to the -CCntrafy; ánd the Charge appearing to have worked ,. no. prejudiCc-tO the appellant, it is not to be error. .</p>