Norton v. Clarks

Texas Supreme Court

Norton v. Clarks

333 S.W.2d 108, 160 Tex. 466, 3 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 243, 1960 Tex. LEXIS 577

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 16, 1960

DocketNo. A-7715

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 333 S.W.2d 108 (Norton v. Clarks) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Norton v. Clarks, 333 S.W.2d 108, 160 Tex. 466, 3 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 243, 1960 Tex. LEXIS 577 (Tex. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

[467]*467This is a suit to set aside the probate of a will. Based on jury findings that the testatrix lacked testamentary capacity and was unduly influenced, the district court set the will aside. The judgment of the trial court was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals on both grounds. 330 S.W. 2d 484. The only assignments of error here are that (1) there was no evidence of lack of testamentary capacity; and (2) there was no evidence of undue influence.

Because we think there was evidence of lack of testamentary capacity sufficient to raise a jury issue, the Court of Civil Appeals reached the correct result. The testimony regarding undue influence does not rise to the dignity of “some evidence.” It raises no more than a surmise or suspicion and hence, in law, is no evidence. Joske v. Irvine, 91 Texas 574, 44 S.W. 1059 (1898) ; Younger Bros. Inc., v. Myers, 159 Texas 585, 324 S.W. 2d 546 (1959).

The application for writ of error is therefore refused, no reversible error.

Opinion delivered March 16, 1960.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI