Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Sullivan
| Decision Date | 27 October 1897 |
| Citation | 42 S.W. 568 |
| Parties | GALVESTON, H. & S. A. RY. CO. v. SULLIVAN. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Bexar county; J. L. Camp, Judge.
Suit by J. O. Sullivan against the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
Upson, Bergstrom & Newton, for appellant. J. D. Martin and J. A. Buckler, for appellee.
This is a suit for damages instituted by appellee, based upon damages received from the overturning of a buggy by a horse, and which resulted in injury to appellee. It was alleged that the injury took place at a street crossing on Dawson street, in the city of San Antonio; that appellee was in the act of driving the horse across the railroad when a freight train suddenly appeared, without giving the statutory signals, and running at a rapid rate, and suddenly emitting steam in an unusual manner, caused the horse to become frightened and overturn the buggy; and that appellee received personal injuries which damaged him in the sum of $5,000. Appellant pleaded general denial and contributory negligence. A trial by jury resulted in a verdict and judgment for appellee for $400. To make out a cause of action it became necessary for appellee to establish the negligence in appellant which was the proximate cause of the injury in one or more of the forms alleged; that is, in failing to give the statutory signals, or in running at a higher rate of speed than was permitted by the city ordinance, or in emitting steam in a sudden and unusual manner. There being no proof that the rate of speed of railroad trains within the city limits was regulated by ordinance, that issue was eliminated, and should not have been submitted to the jury. It was done, however, and appellant assigns that action of the court as error. We conclude that the assignment is well taken. "A charge should not be given when there is not sufficient evidence fairly to raise an issue of fact to which it relates, for the giving of a charge under such circumstances induces a jury to believe that in the opinion of the court there is such evidence." Railway Co. v. Platzer, 73 Tex. 117, 11 S. W. 160; Railway Co. v. Blohn, 73 Tex. 637, 11 S. W. 867.
It is insisted by appellee that, although there was no proof of the existence of an ordinance regulating the speed of trains, still, there being another issue upon which the jury might have found for appellee, a reversal of the judgment for such...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
St. Louis, S. F. & T. Ry. Co. v. Gilliam & Jackson
...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 no error in the record requiring a reversal of t......
-
Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co. v. Humphreys
...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. 579, 58 S. W. 614, 621; G., H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Harling (T......
-
Humphries v. Louisiana Ry. & Irr. Co. of Texas
...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. 579, 58 S. W. 614, 621; G., H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Harling (T......
-
Schaff v. Moss
...but railway employés who were present could testify," and that proof of such fact did not require expert testimony. Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. Sullivan, 42 S. W. 568. In the case at bar appellee based his upon the force with which the car he was in collided with the other car and the ......