Anderson v. Moore, B--1657
| Citation | 448 S.W.2d 105 |
| Decision Date | 03 December 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. B--1657,B--1657 |
| Parties | J. C. ANDERSON, Petitioner, v. Collin Emmett MOORE, Jr., Respondent. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Texas |
Wright & Barber, Will Barber, Grand Prairie, for petitioner.
Akin, Vial, Hamilton, Koch & Tubb, Don Campbell, Dallas, for respondent.
In this suit by J. C. Anderson against Collin Emmett Moore Jr. and Billy Self and his wife for damages suffered as a result of an automobile collision, in which there was a settlement and a severance as to Self and wife, the trial court instructed a verdict in favor of defendant, Moore, and, as to such defendant, rendered judgment that plaintiff take nothing, and that Moore take nothing in a third-party action for indemnity or contribution against Self. Anderson appealed. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed. 442 S.W.2d 425. We reverse the judgments of the courts below and remand the cause to the trial court for trial.
The only question to be decided is whether there is in the record evidence of probative force that Moore was guilty of any negligent act or omission which was a proximate cause of the collision of his automobile with Anderson's automobile. If so, the trial court erred in instructing a verdict for Moore and in thus taking the case from the jury. In deciding the question, we will honor the rule that the evidence is to be considered in its most favorable light in support of the plaintiff's case. Triangle Motors of Dallas v. Richmond, 152 Tex. 354, 258 S.W.2d 60 (1953).
Moore was traveling in an easterly direction on a State highway in Collin County, and Anderson was traveling in the opposite direction on the same highway, when the collision occurred. As Moore crested a high point in the highway and started his descent to a lower elevation, Mrs. Self drove her automobile from a store driveway on the north side of the highway into Moore's traffic lane with the intention of traveling only a short distance to the East before turning to her right (to the South) into Milligan Road. After Mrs. Self entered his traffic lane, Moore applied his brakes, went into a side-spin slide, struck the rear of the Self automobile, spun across the highway and struck the Anderson automobile which had been driven onto the north shoulder of the highway to avoid being hit.
Anderson alleged that Moore was guilty of several negligent acts and omissions, each of which was alleged to be a proximate cause of the collision. Among the acts or omissions alleged, were,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eagle Trucking Co. v. Texas Bitulithic Co.
...having probative force upon which a jury could have made a finding against them and in favor of Fitch and Eagle Trucking. Anderson v. Moore, 448 S.W.2d 105 (Tex.1969); Burnett v. First National Bank of Waco, 536 S.W.2d 600, 607 (Tex.Civ.App. Eastland 1976, writ ref'd n. r. e.). The evidence......
-
Parkway Co. v. Woodruff
...present any probative evidence to support its claim, and the winning party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Anderson v. Moore, 448 S.W.2d 105, 106 (Tex.1969); Multi-Moto v. ITT Commercial Fin. Corp., 806 S.W.2d 560, 566 (Tex.App.--Dallas 1990, writ denied). In reviewing a directe......
-
T-L Drilling Co. v. Northern Propane Gas Co.
...case, the court must review the evidence in its most favorable light in support of the drilling company's position. Anderson v. Moore, 448 S.W.2d 105 (Tex.Sup.1969); Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, 451 S.W.2d 752 (Tex.Sup.1970); McKethan v. McKethan, 477 S.W.2d 357 (Tex.Civ.App.--Co......
-
Gentry v. Southern Pacific Company
...applied the rule that the evidence is to be considered in its most favorable light in support of the plaintiff's case. Anderson v. Moore, Tex.1969, 448 S.W.2d 105; Triangle Motors of Dallas v. Richmond, 152 Tex. 354, 258 S.W.2d The accident in question occurred when the front end of the loc......