Volume 40 — Washington Reports, Second Series

[1] CONSPIRACY — CIVIL LIABILITY — ACTS CONSTITUTING. A conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons to commit a criminal or unlawful act, or to commit a lawful act by criminal or unlawful means. [2] SAME — EVIDENCE — CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. A finding that a conspiracy existed may be based on circumstantial evidence. [3] SAME — EVIDENCE — PROOF REQUIRED. Before a person can be held liable as a conspirator, the evidence must show that he entered into an agreement with the other conspirators to accomplish the object of the conspiracy. [4] SAME. The evidence required to establish a conspiracy to defraud and cheat must be clear and convincing. [5] SAME. In an action for conspiracy to defraud, in which it was alleged that, by concerted acts, the defendants had seized a certain truck and tractor belonging to the plaintiff and had forced him to sell them for less than their true value, held that the evidence fails to establish that there was a conspiratorial agreement between the defendants, and that the evidence clearly preponderates against the findings of the trial court that a conspiracy existed as alleged. [6] SAME — FRAUD — SALE OF PROPERTY — MOTIVE. Ordinarily, in the absence of fraud, courts are not concerned with the motives which impel a person to make a lawful purchase of property. [7] SAME — EVIDENCE — PROOF REQUIRED. Where the facts and circumstances relied upon to establish a conspiracy are as consistent with a lawful or honest purpose as with an unlawful undertaking, they are insufficient. [8] APPEAL AND ERROR — REVIEW — THEORY OF CASE. Where an action was brought and tried upon the theory of a conspiracy, it will not be reviewed in the supreme court upon the theory that the acts complained of were tortious. [1] See 11 Am. Jur. 550.<page_number>Page 558</page_number>