Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Huebner
| Decision Date | 10 November 1897 |
| Citation | 42 S.W. 1021 |
| Parties | GALVESTON, H. & S. A. RY. CO. v. HUEBNER.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Bexar county; J. L. Camp, Judge.
Action by W. Huebner against the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Company. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Upson, Bergstrom & Newton, for appellant. W. E. Cox and Ed. Haltom, for appellee.
This suit was brought by the appellee against appellant to recover damages for injuries to his person and wagon occasioned by the alleged negligence of the latter's servants in so operating one of its trains as to cause it to collide with appellee's wagon, in which he and his daughter were riding, at a public crossing on appellant's railway. The case was tried before a jury, and resulted in a judgment in favor of appellee for $650.
Conclusions of Fact.
On the 21st day of July, 1896, the appellee was riding in a wagon with his little daughter along a public road, which for some distance runs south of, and near, appellant's railroad track. This wagon road turns and crosses the track 950 feet east of a cut through which the railroad is constructed. There is a whistling board 1,280 feet from this crossing. The appellee, until he reached the point where the wagon road turns to cross the track, had been driving in an easterly direction, and had not seen or heard appellant's train, which was coming in the same direction. When he reached the point where the road turns, he looked all the way up to the cut for a train, and, failing to hear or see one, he, without looking any more, drove upon the crossing, and one of appellant's trains, which was running very fast, collided with his wagon, and broke it to pieces, and appellee was thrown on the ground and injured. Had the appellee, from any part of the road between where it turned and the crossing, looked for the approaching train, he could have seen it. From where the road turns, and appellee looked for a train, to the crossing, is about 50 feet, and along this distance he was driving slowly. There is testimony sufficient to authorize us, in deference to the verdict, in finding that the appellant's servants operating the train never sounded the statutory whistle for the crossing, and that no signal of the approach of the train was given until it was too late for appellee to avail himself of the warning, and we so find. We also, in deference to the verdict of the jury, conclude that appellee was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Judd v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Co.
... ... 220, 41 P.2d 629; Pokora v. Wabash Ry ... Co., supra ; Nichols v. Chicago, B. & Q. R ... Co., 44 Colo. 501, 98 P. 808, at 813; Galveston, H ... & S. A. R. R. Co. v. Huebner, (Tex. Civ. App.) 42 S.W ... 1021; Rice v. Erie R. Co., 271 Pa. 180, 114 A. 640; ... Cromley v. Pa. Ry ... ...
-
Jennison v. Darnielle
...might go only to the weight thereof. A number of cases have held this character of testimony admissible. Galveston H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Huebner, Tex.Civ. App., 42 S.W. 1021; McCabe v. San Antonio Traction Co., 39 Tex.Civ.App. 614, 88 S.W. 387; Beaumont Traction Co. v. Dilworth, Tex.Civ.App......
-
St. Louis, S. F. & T. Ry. Co. v. Gilliam & Jackson
...St. Rep. 42. A witness may be allowed, although he is not an expert, to testify that a train was running fast or slow. G., H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Huebner, 42 S. W. 1021; G., H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Sullivan, 42 S. W. 568; G., C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Bell, 24 Tex. Civ. App. 579, 58 S. W. We find ......
-
Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co. v. Humphreys
...That this is the recognized rule in this state will appear from an examination of the following cases: G., H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Huebner (Tex. Civ. App.) 42 S. W. 1021; G., H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Sullivan (Tex. Civ. App.) 42 S. W. 568, 569; G., C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Bell, 24 Tex. Civ. App. 5......