Contest of Wills—Rules of Evidence Similar, to Those in Other Civil Actions—Weight and Sufficiency.—The rules of evidence and the weight to be accorded to the evidence are the same in a contested will case as in any other civil ease, and those rules apply when the question goes to the sufficiency of the evidence to justify its submission to the jury.

Id.—Evidence—Duty of Trial Court to Set Aside Verdict if Contrary to Weight of Evidence.-—In this state, though the evidence pro and con upon the issues be substantial and conflicting, it is the duty of the trial judge to set aside a verdict at least once if his conviction is that the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence and oftener if he is impressed with it's injustice.

Id.—Verdict Directed in Same Cases as Nonsuit Granted.—The right of a court to direct a verdict' is, touching the condition of the evidence, absolutely the same as the right of the court to grant a nonsuit.

Id.—When Proper to Grant Nonsuit.—The court may grant a nonsuit only when, disregarding conflicting evidence and giving to plaintiff’s evidence all the value to which it' is legally entitled, herein indulging in every legitimate inference which may he drawn from that evidence, the result is a determination that there is no evidence of sufficient substantiality to support a verdict in favor of plaintiff if such a verdict were given.

Id.—Duty of Court to Set Aside Verdict.—If no motion for a non-suit has been made and the issues have been turned over to the consideration of the jury, and that jury has rendered a verdict' in favor of plaintiff, such verdict being unsupported by any substantial evidence, it becomes the imperative duty of the court to set it aside.

Id.—Duty of Court to Grant Nonsuit or Direct a Verdict.—When, and only when, the evidence of the proponent could not' give substantial support to a verdict in favor of proponent, the court may and should grant a nonsuit, and may and should direct a verdict.

Id.—Bulb as to Directed Verdicts.—The rule as to directed verdicts is, not that' a verdict may be directed whenever the evidence is such that upon motion the court would grant a new trial, for the court may grant a new trial even when there is substantial evidence to sustain the verdict, if it believes that the evidence preponderates against the verdict, but a verdict should he directed whenever upon the whole evidence the court would be compelled to set aside a contrary verdict as unsupported by the evidence.

Id.—When Improper to Grant a Nonsuit or to Direct a Verdict.— In a contest t'o revoke the probate of a will, if the contestant presented evidence such that notwithstanding the conflict raised by proponent’s evidence it would support a verdict in favor of contestant, it would be error for the court to grant a motion for a nonsuit or to direct a verdict.

Id.—In Case at Bar Directed Verdict Held Erroneous.—In this ease the evidence of the contestant is held to be of such weight and substantiality that, notwithstanding the evidence of the proponent, there was a substantial conflict of evidence upon the soundness of mind of the testator, and the question of undue influence, and it was error for the trial court to direct a verdict in favor of tho proponent, but, on the contrary, the trial court should have submitted the cause to the jury.