Jones v. Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 08 April 1903
• Citation: 73 S.W. 1082
• Parties: JONES v. GULF, C. & S. F. RY. CO.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

73 S.W. 1082

JONES v. GULF, C. & S. F. RY. CO.^*

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

April 8, 1903.

Appeal from District Court, Montgomery County; L. B. Hightower, Judge.

Action by W. W. Jones against the Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Company. From a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

A. W. Boyd, M. G. Fakes, and A. H. Jayne, for appellant. J. W. Terry and F. J. & R. C. Duff, for appellee.

GARRETT, C. J.

This action was brought by W. W. Jones against the Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Company to recover damages for personal injuries received by the wife of the plaintiff while a passenger on one of the defendant's trains, and to that end to set aside a release executed by the plaintiff to the defendant. Demurrers to the petition were sustained by the trial court, and, the plaintiff declining to amend, final judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant.

After allegations to show that the plaintiff's wife received the injuries complained of, and that they were the result of the negligence of the defendant, and the damages sustained thereby, the petition alleged the following facts to avoid the release: "That defendant's servants, to wit, Drs. Peeples, Phillips, and H. Waters, and defendant's claim agent, Evans, examined plaintiff's wife as to the extent of her injuries within a short time after said collision, and before the signing of the release, each of whom recognizing and knowing defendant's liability to plaintiff for said injuries. That for the purpose of obtaining a release from plaintiff for the damages aforesaid, and for the purpose of deceiving plaintiff, and inveigling him to execute a release for said injuries, the said physicians and claim agent, acting for and representing said defendant, stated to plaintiff that his wife was only slightly injured, and that she would be well in a few weeks, and would be able to do and perform her usual duties; that she was not severely hurt; that she had not sustained any injuries except those apparent upon her person, which consisted of slight bruises and the shake-up attending the sudden jar at the time of the collision—which statements and representations were untrue, and known to be untrue to said physicians at the time. If they were not so known, they should have been known to them at the time, and could have been known by their skill as physicians. That plaintiff believed said representations to be true at the time, and acted upon them, and each of them, in making and executing the release hereinafter referred to; that said statements and representations were untrue and made for the sole purpose to induce him to sign said release. That plaintiff did not know of their falsity, and had no means of knowing the extent of said injury except through said physicians, who were acting as the agents of the defendant. That he believed the statements of the physicians and claim agent at the time he executed said release. That he would not have signed said release if he had known the falsity of said statements, made as aforesaid. That he relied solely upon the...