Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928

Hill v. Hill

Hill v. Hill
Supreme Court of Alabama · Decided May 10, 1928 · Anderson, Somerville, Thomas, Brown
117 So. 32; 217 Ala. 445; 1928 Ala. LEXIS 41 (Southern Reporter)

Hill v. Hill

Opinion of the Court

ANDERSON, C. J.

While a charge of this character need not necessarily be directly proven and can be established by circumstantial evidence, tbe ’ circumstances proved “ ‘must be such as would lead the' guarded discretion of a reasonable and just man to tbe conclusion’ that ttm act has been committed.” Morrison v. Morrison, 95 Ala. 309, 10 So. 648. Tbe evidence in this case, consisting only of tbe complainant’s deposition, has been read and considered by tbe court in consulta *446 •tion, and we do not think that it is so certain and specific as to warrant us in holding that the respondent is guilty of the act charged, •and the trial court did not err in denying the complainant relief.

The decree of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, and BROWN, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.