McCasland v. Henwood
Decision Date | 17 June 1948 |
Docket Number | No. 6362.,6362. |
Citation | 213 S.W.2d 555 |
Parties | McCASLAND et al. v. HENWOOD. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Cass County; Robert S. Vance, Judge.
Suit by Pete McCasland, individually and as next friend of his four children, against Berryman Henwood, trustee for the St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company of Texas, for death of plaintiff's wife, Erline McCasland, deceased, and injuries to plaintiff resulting from collision between automobile driven by plaintiff and train operated by defendant, wherein R. P. Bobo and wife, Maudie Bobo, father and mother respectively of deceased wife of plaintiff, intervened. From an adverse judgment, plaintiffs and intervenors appeal.
Judgment affirmed.
Carney, Carney & Mays, of Atlanta, for appellants.
Otto Atchley, of Texarkana, and Robert F. Salmon, of Linden, for appellee.
The following clear and concise statement of the case made by appellants in their brief and admitted by appellee to be correct, is adopted by this court:
The court rendered judgment for the defendant on the verdict and plaintiffs and intervenors have duly perfected their appeal to this court.
Appellants assert by their first point that the trial court erred in refusing to grant them a new trial because of the misconduct of the jury in discussing the effect of certain of their answers while deliberating on the case. The particular alleged misconduct to which our attention is directed by this point relates to certain discussions in the jury room by one or more jurors to the effect that it was immaterial how they answered certain of the special issues; that the appellants would still get their damages assessed by the jury in the answer to the last special issue.
This case arises out of an injury to appellant McCasland and the death of his wife which occurred at a railway and public road crossing known as Eylau crossing. This crossing is formed by the appellee railway company's track and a public highway referred to in the record as the old T. & P. Dump Road. Appellee will hereafter be referred to as "the railway" and the Dump Road as "the highway." The railway and the highway cross each other at right angles. The highway is graveled and is quite extensively used by the public since the construction of the war plants west of Texarkana. This highway intersects State Highway No. 11 at what is known as Baker's store. A great number of persons traveling from the towns of Atlanta and Queen City and surrounding territory travel State Highway No. 11 to Baker's store and then turn off to the left onto the highway in question to the war plants west of Texarkana. (The evidence shows that the railway track is from 2½ to 4 feet above the level of the highway crossing). McCasland together with his wife and another party were traveling the highway from the south at about 11 o'clock at night when they drove their car into a freight train of appellee which was moving slowly along said crossing. Appellants' automobile struck the third or fourth oil tank car from the engine and about thirty-eighth or thirty-ninth car from the caboose. Pete McCasland, the driver, was seriously injured and his wife and a party...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Dofner v. Branard
...would become a question of fact for the jury. Empire Gas & Fuel Co. v. Muegge, 135 Tex. 520, 143 S.W.2d 763; McCasland v. Henwood, Tex.Civ.App., 213 S.W.2d 555; Sellers v. State, 93 Ark. 313, 124 S.W. 770; Funke v. St. Louis-San Francisco R. Co., 225 Mo.App. 347, 35 S.W.2d 977; Bane v. Atla......
-
Ball v. Yowell, 6446.
...277, writ refused, want of merit. See also Hill v. Connors, Tex.Civ.App., 219 S.W.2d 587, and authorities there cited; McCasland v. Henwood, Tex.Civ.App., 213 S.W.2d 555. By their first point appellants assert that the trial court erred in holding appellees' oil and gas lease valid and that......
-
Solana v. Hill
...the amount of appellant's damages is immaterial. Western Textile Products Co. v. Sidran, 153 Tex. 21, 262 S.W.2d 942; McCasland v. Henwood, Tex.Civ.App., 213 S.W.2d 555, (Ref. N.R.E.); McGee v. Cunningham, Tex.Civ.App., 17 S.W.2d 494, 496, and Jones v. St. John, Tex.Civ.App., 178 S.W.2d 181......
-
Chanowsky v. Friedman, 15018.
...by the trial court the appellate court will rarely set those findings aside and substitute its own in lieu thereof. McCasland et al. v. Henwood, Tex.Civ.App., 213 S.W.2d 555, writ refused, n. r. e.; Long-Bell Lumber Co. v. Bynum, 138 Tex. 267, 158 S.W.2d 290. Where no separate findings of f......