Carrico v. Stop-N-Go Markets of Texas, Inc., STOP-N-GO

• Court: Texas Civil Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: CADENA
• Citation: Carrico v. Stop-N-Go Markets of Texas, Inc., 492 S.W.2d 383 (Tex. Ct. App. 1973)
• Decision Date: 14 March 1973
• Docket Number: No. 15159,STOP-N-GO,15159
• Parties: Wallace CARRICO, Appellant, v.MARKETS OF TEXAS, INC., Appellee.

Page 383

492 S.W.2d 383

Wallace CARRICO, Appellant, v. STOP-N-GO MARKETS OF TEXAS, INC., Appellee.

No. 15159.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas San Antonio.

March 14, 1973.

Evans & Marshall, Frank Y. Hill, Jr., San Antonio, for appellant.

Groce, Locke & Hebdon, Damon Ball, San Antonio, for appellee.

CADENA, Justice.

Appellant, Wallace Carrico, plaintiff below, here asserts the trial court erred in granting the motion of defendant, Stop-N-Go Markets of Texas, Inc., for an instructed verdict.

Plaintiff sued to recover for personal injuries allegedly suffered by him when he slipped and fell on defendant's premises. At the conclusion of plaintiff's testimony, defendant moved for instructed verdict on the following grounds: (1) There was no evidence showing that the condition of defendant's premises created an unreasonable risk. (2) There was no evidence that defendant or any of its agents or employees knew of the existence of the dangerous condition. (3) There is no evidence that defendant's servants, by the exercise of reasonable care, could have discovered the dangerous condition. (4) There is no evidence that defendant or any of its servants could have anticipated that plaintiff or any other invitee would not have discovered the dangerous conditions of the premises. (5) There is no evidence showing that the dangerous condition was not open and obvious. (6) If there was a dangerous condition, plaintiff knew of such condition, appreciated the danger, and voluntarily encountered it.

The judgment merely recites that the motion for instructed verdict was granted, without specifying the ground or grounds upon which the court relied in withdrawing the case from the jury and rendering judgment for defendant.

Plaintiff here presents but a single point of error,...