City of Waco v. Landingham
| Decision Date | 03 December 1941 |
| Docket Number | No. 7732.,7732. |
| Parties | CITY OF WACO v. LANDINGHAM. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Action by Charlie Landingham against the City of Waco to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff as result of the defendant's negligence. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the defendant appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals. The Court of Civil Appeals, 158 S.W.2d 79, reversed the judgment and rendered judgment for defendant, and, pending final action on motion for rehearing, certifies a question of law to the Supreme Court.
Question answered.
Allan D. Sanford, City Atty., and George W. Morrow and Mabel Grey Howell, Asst. City Attys., all of Waco, for appellant.
Bryan & Maxwell, of Waco, for appellee.
This case is before us on a certified question from the Court of Civil Appeals at Waco. The certificate is accompanied by an opinion, as required by our rules.
It appears that Charlie Landingham sued the City of Waco, Texas, for damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been received by him as a result of the negligence of the city. Trial in the district court with the aid of a jury resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of Landingham in the sum of $10,500. On appeal by the city to the Court of Civil Appeals, that court reversed the judgment of the district court and rendered judgment for the city. Pending final action on motion for rehearing filed by Landingham, the Court of Civil Appeals has certified a question of law to this court. We will later state such question.
It appears that the City of Waco is what is generally known as a home rule city. It is governed by a charter, which contains the following provision:
The record before us shows that Landingham attempted to comply with the above charter provision, but the Court of Civil Appeals found that the statement or claim as filed was insufficient, as a matter of law, to meet the requirements of such charter provision, and for that reason reversed the judgment of the district court and rendered judgment for the city.
On original hearing in the Court of Civil...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nelson v. Krusen
...strike down the statutes merely because they might operate in an unconstitutional manner in another case. See City of Waco v. Landingham, 138 Tex. 156, 157 S.W.2d 631 (Tex.1941); see also Kentucky Union Co. v. Kentucky, 219 U.S. 140, 31 S.Ct. 171, 55 L.Ed. 137 (1910). In stark contrast, the......
-
Johnson v. Maryland State Police
...291 Or. 77, 628 P.2d 1183 (1981) (180-day deadline); Budahl v. Gordon & Davis Assoc., supra (60-day deadline); City of Waco v. Landingham, 138 Tex. 156, 157 S.W.2d 631 (1941) (30-day deadline); Sears v. Southworth, 563 P.2d 192 (Utah 1977) (one year deadline); Yotvat v. Roth, 95 Wis.2d 357,......
-
Rowland v. Washtenaw County Road Com'n
...Transp. Auth., 505 Pa. 137, 477 A.2d 1302 (1984); Budahl v. Gordon & David Assoc., 287 N.W.2d 489 (S.D., 1980); City of Waco v. Landingham, 138 Tex. 156, 157 S.W.2d 631 (1941); Sears v. Southworth, 563 P.2d 192 (Utah, 1977). We agree with the majority 10. As United States Supreme Court Just......
-
Teal Trading & Dev., LP v. Champee Springs Ranches Prop. Owners Ass'n
... ... Loram Maint., Inc. v. Ianni , 210 S.W.3d 593, 596 (Tex. 2006) ; City of Houston v. Jackson , 192 S.W.3d 764, 769 (Tex. 2006). The rationale for the doctrine is that it ... ...