Claitor v. City of Comanche, 3098
| Decision Date | 10 September 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 3098,3098 |
| Citation | 271 S.W.2d 465 |
| Parties | G. B. CLAITOR et al., Appellants, v. The CITY OF COMANCHE, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Sam Cleveland, Stephenville, Dick Harbin, Dublin, for appellants.
Howell E. Cobb, Comanche, Joseph A. Chandler, Stephenville, for appellee.
G. B. Claitor and wife, Naoma Claitor, individually and as next friend of their minor son, Ralph Bennett Claitor, brought suit against The City of Comanche, a municipal corporation. Plaintiffs alleged that on September 24, 1950, and for several years prior thereto, defendant City operated and maintained a certain park area, located outside of and adjacent to said City and known as Lake Eans Park; that on said date the minor plaintiff, Ralph Bennett Claitor, was making use of a swing located in the park which along with other facilities of said park area, was under the supervision and control of and maintained by said City; that such swing had been constructed and placed in the park to be used by children for the purpose of swinging thereon. It was alleged that the swing was unsound, unsafe and inherently dangerous; that while the said Ralph Bennett Claitor was making use of the swing, by swinging thereon in the normal and customary manner, suddenly and without warning, the swing fell to the ground, thereby inflicting painful, serious and permanent injury to said Ralph Bennett Claitor. Plaintiffs sought judgment for damages against the City in the sum of $62.200. Defendant City filed exceptions to plaintiffs' petition and the cause of action alleged therein, alleging that under the provisions of Article 6081d, Sec. 3, Vernon's Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, the City was exempt from liability for negligent injury to persons resulting from any defective, unsound or unsafe condition of its park or the equipment therein. The trial court sustained the exception and dismitted the case. To such action of the court the Claitors excepted and gave notice of appeal.
The statutory provision in question is as follows:
Article 6081d, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Corsicana v. Wren
...697, at page 699, followed by Hanks v. City of Port Arthur, 1932, 121 Tex. 202, 48 S.W.2d 944, 83 A.L.R. 278.10 Claitor v. City of Comanche, Tex.Civ.App.1954, 271 S.W.2d 465 (no writ), noted 7 Baylor Law Review 326.11 A recent law review concludes that, 'Based upon this examination of the d......
-
Hunt v. City of Longview
...S.W.2d 800, 801 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Obviously that presumption can be rebutted. See, e.g., Claitor v. City of Comanche, 271 S.W.2d 465 (Tex.Civ.App. — Eastland 1954, no writ); City of Amarillo v. Tutor, 267 S.W. 697 (Tex.Comm'n App.1924, judgm't Defendants also......
-
Wren v. City of Corsicana
...Sec. 27; City of Blackwell v. Lee, 1936, 178 Okl. 338, 62 P.2d 1219; Indamer Corp. v. Crandon, 5 Cir., 1952, 196 F.2d 5; Claitor v. City of Comanche, 271 S.W.2d 465 (no writ history); Housing Authority of City of Dallas v. Higginbotham, 135 Tex. 158, 143 S.W.2d 79; 30B Tex.Jur. 1213, sec. 6......
-
Dancer v. City of Houston
...5 S.W.2d 761 (1928); Scroggins v. City of Harlingen, 131 Tex. 237, 112 S.W.2d 1035, 114 S.W.2d 853 (1938); Claitor v. City of Comanche, Tex.Civ.App., 271 S.W.2d 465, no wr. hist. In Hillman v. City of Anniston, 214 Ala. 522, 108 So. 539, 46 A.L.R. 89 (1926). the Supreme Court of Alabama in ......