Russell v. Great American Indemnity Co.
| Decision Date | 13 May 1936 |
| Docket Number | No. 6665.,6665. |
| Citation | 94 S.W.2d 409 |
| Parties | RUSSELL v. GREAT AMERICAN INDEMNITY CO. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Hart Johnson, of Fort Stockton, and White & Yarborough, of Dallas, for plaintiff in error.
Collins, Jackson & Snodgrass, of San Angelo, and W. C. Jackson, of Fort Stockton, for defendant in error.
This is a compensation suit. It appears that E. M. Russell sustained injuries in the course of his employment while working for one E. D. Porter. The injuries were sustained on the 20th of June, 1932. Great American Indemnity Company was Porter's compensation insurance carrier. The Industrial Accident Board duly made an award. Russell was dissatisfied therewith and duly perfected his appeal to the district court of Pecos county, Tex., the court having jurisdiction. The case was finally tried in that court, where it was submitted to a jury on special issues. Based on the answers of the jury to such issues, judgment was entered awarding Russell compensation at the rate of $9.69 per week for 401 weeks, for permanent total disability. On appeal by the indemnity company this judgment was reversed and the cause remanded. 63 S.W.(2d) 402. Russell brings error. At this point we deem it advisable to quote from the trial court's charge special issues Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, including the jury's answers thereto:
The indemnity company excepted to issue No. 6, supra, as follows: "To Special Issue No. 6 for the reason...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Brownsville v. Alvarado
...charge as a whole." Texas Employers Ins. Ass'n v. McKay, 146 Tex. 569, 210 S.W.2d 147, 149 (1948) (citing Russell v. Great Am. Indem. Co., 127 Tex. 458, 94 S.W.2d 409, 410 (1936)). Assuming without deciding that submission of Question 2 (Ricardo's negligence) was improper, it was plainly im......
-
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Harris
...when so construed, we think it is not fairly susceptible of the construction given it by the defendant. See Russell v. Great American Indemnity Co., 127 Tex. 458, 94 S.W.2d 409, 410. We think reversible error is not The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. ...
-
Highway Ins. Underwriters v. Spradlin
...529, affirmed 134 Tex. 151, 132 S.W.2d 399; Marek v. Southern Enterprises of Texas, 128 Tex. 377, 99 S.W.2d 594; Russell v. Great American Ind. Co., 127 Tex. 458, 94 S.W.2d 409. The other points presented by appellant are disposed of by what has been said, or are such as need not occur upon......
-
Strickland Grp., Inc. v. Pathfinder Exploration, LLC
...Texas Employers Ins. Assn v. McKay, 146 Tex. 569, 210 S.W.2d 147, 149 (1948) (citing Russell v. Great Am. Indem. Co., 127 Tex. 458, 94 S.W.2d 409, 410 (1936)). City of Brownsville v. Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d 750, 752 (Tex. 1995); see also Crowson v. Bowen, 320 S.W.3d 486, 489 (Tex. App.—Fort Wo......