Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Evans

Decision Date27 October 1943
Docket NumberNo. 8115.,8115.
Citation175 S.W.2d 249
PartiesGREAT ATLANTIC & PACIFIC TEA CO. v. EVANS.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

Touchstone, Wight, Gormley & Touchstone, of Dallas, for plaintiff in error.

John W. West and Wm. H. Hall, both of Dallas, for defendant in error.

CRITZ, Justice.

This suit was instituted in the District Court of Dallas County, Texas, by Royce O. Evans against The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, hereinafter called A. & P., to recover damages for a personal injury alleged to have been received by Evans as the result of the negligence of defendant. Trial in the district court resulted in a verdict and judgment for Evans in the sum of $975. This judgment was affirmed by the El Paso Court of Civil Appeals, to which the case was transferred by this Court. This Court granted a writ of error on the application of A. & P.

By his petition in the district court, Evans alleged that on or about June 29, 1939, he sustained a personal injury in the form of a hernia; that such injury was received while in the discharge of his duties as an employee of A. & P.; that such injury was caused by lifting and carrying sacks of potatoes, weighing about 100 pounds each, from the sidewalk in front of A. & P.'s store to the rear thereof, a distance of about 75 or 80 feet; that A. & P. was guilty of negligence, which proximately caused his injury, by requiring him to carry these 100-pound sacks of potatoes the distance above mentioned without someone to assist him, or without furnishing him a truck or some other mechanical means on which to haul them.

Evans testified: That at the time he was injured he was a young man, about 21 or 22 years of age; that at such time he weighed about 150 or 155 pounds; that he was then strong and robust and in good health; that such was his physical appearance; that he was employed by A. & P. as a stock boy and assistant manager; that his usual duties required him to move produce from the sidewalk in front of the store to the interior thereof, sometimes a distance of 75 or 80 feet; that he was injured by moving some sacks of potatoes which weighed about 100 pounds; that such injury was a hernia; that in moving such potatoes he lifted and carried them the distance indicated; that he had been doing the same character of work for several months before his injury without making any complaint, and without suffering any harm by so doing; that in his experience as an employee of A. & P. and other grocery stores he had seen other employees handle sacks of potatoes just as he handled these sacks of potatoes; that some stores had trucks, and others did not; that this store had no truck, and he knew that fact; that he had worked in stores that had trucks, and in stores that did not, and that it was usual for grocery store employees to handle 100-pound sacks of potatoes in the way and manner he handled these sacks.

Evans further testified: That at first he asked the store manager to help him move these sacks of potatoes; that the manager complied with such request and assisted him in moving some of the sacks; that before all of the potatoes were moved the manager was called to wait on a customer; that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
69 cases
  • Austin v. Kroger Tex., L.P.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • 12 Junio 2015
    ...197 S.W.3d at 795 (citing Werner v. Colwell, 909 S.W.2d 866, 869 (Tex.1995), which cites Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. v. Evans, 142 Tex. 1, 175 S.W.2d 249, 251 (1943) ). It is undisputed that mopping up spills is the same character of work that Austin—as the store's self-described “floor clean......
  • Texas Brine Corp. v. Lofton
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • 11 Abril 1985
    ...... injury and without which no harm would have occurred." Texas & Pacific Railway v. McCleery, 418 S.W.2d 494, 497 (Tex.1967). The foreseeability ...'s speed was a proximate cause of the collision was against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. .         In his ... Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Evans, 142 Tex. 1, 175 S.W.2d 249 (1943); Central ......
  • Austin v. Kroger Tex., L.P., 14-0216
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Texas
    • 12 Junio 2015
    ...precarious." Elwood, 197 S.W.3d at 795 (citing Werner v. Colwell, 909 S.W.2d 866, 869 (Tex. 1995), which cites Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. v. Evans, 175 S.W.2d 249, 251 (Tex. 1943)). It is undisputed that mopping up spills is the same character of work that Austin—as the store's self-describe......
  • Zidell v. Bird
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • 22 Mayo 1985
    ...... Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Evans, 142 Tex. 1, 175 S.W.2d 249 (1943). . ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT