Federal Underwriters Exchange v. Lynch
| Decision Date | 03 February 1943 |
| Docket Number | No. 2443-7990.,2443-7990. |
| Citation | 168 S.W.2d 653 |
| Parties | FEDERAL UNDERWRITERS EXCHANGE v. LYNCH. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
This is a workman's compensation case. A trial court judgment for respondent, P. L. Lynch, based on jury answers to special issues, was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals at Beaumont in an opinion not published.
All errors assigned by the petitioner, Federal Underwriters Exchange, grow out of its objections to the court's charge. The case was tried before the effective date of our present rules of civil procedure, therefore the questions raised must be considered in the light of the principles then applicable. Rule 814, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
Lynch alleged total, permanent incapacity resulting from general injury. He claimed also a specific injury to his right leg resulting in total and permanent loss of its use. Petitioner's answer on the merits consisted of a general denial and special, affirmative defenses, among which was that if Lynch suffered any injury it was confined to his right leg, loss of use of which was only partial and only temporary.
In its eighth point of error petitioner complains of an alleged conditional submission of special issues 32 and 33 and related special issues 34 to 38, both inclusive, of the court's charge. We find no such objection was made in the trial court except as to special issue 33, which inquired whether Lynch "has sustained or will sustain a partial loss of the use of his right leg as a natural result of said injury, if any." The preliminary instruction given by the trial court in connection with special issue 33 was to answer it only in the event either special issue 26 or 28 was answered "No." Special issue 26 asked whether Lynch sustained a total loss of use of his right leg. Petitioner's exception was that "the preliminary instruction immediately preceding special issue 33 constitutes a conditional submission of such defensive theory and the defendant is entitled to have the same unconditionally submitted." The subject matter of special...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Campbell v. State
...procedure, that the above principles of law have been approved and adopted by the Supreme Court of Texas, see Federal Underwriters Exchange v. Lynch, 168 S.W.2d 653 (1943); Airline Motor Coaches, Inc., v. Fields et al., 166 S.W.2d 917 (1943), which held that where a case was tried before th......
-
Texas Employers Ins. Ass'n v. Patterson
...107 S.W.2d 603, 606, 607; Dallas Ry. & Term. Co. v. Garrison, Tex.Com.App., 45 S.W.2d 183, 185; Federal Underwriters Exchange v. Lynch, 140 Tex. 516, 518, 168 S.W.2d 653; Southern Underwriters v. Samanie, 137 Tex. 531, 540, 155 S.W.2d 359; Texas Indemnity Ins. Co. v. Thibodeaux, 129 Tex. 65......
-
Texas Emp. Ins. Ass'n v. Stone
...his incapacity was partial, not total. It was reversible error to submit partial incapacity conditionally. Federal Underwriters Exchange v. Lynch, 140 Tex. 516, 168 S.W.2d 653, 654; Southern Underwriters v. Samanie, 137 Tex. 531, 155 S.W.2d 359, 364; Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n v. Patterson......
-
National Carloading Corp. v. Kitchen Designs, Inc., 8047
...to pass on the sufficiency of a point in the context of the statement and argument thereunder. See Federal Underwriters Exchange v. Lynch, 140 Tex. 516, 168 S.W.2d 653 (Tex.Com.App.1943). This procedure will be followed even though in this instance the points are technically imperfect and m......