Searight v. City of Austin
| Decision Date | 01 December 1897 |
| Citation | 42 S.W. 857 |
| Parties | SEARIGHT et al. v. CITY OF AUSTIN. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Travis county; R. E. Brooks, Judge.
Action by Gilbert A. Searight and another against the city of Austin. From a judgment dismissing the action, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
Hogg & Robertson, for appellants. Geo. F. Pendexter, for appellee.
This suit was brought by appellants, the father and mother of Gilbert A. Searight, to recover damages against the city of Austin for the alleged wrongful and negligent killing of the son. The court below sustained general and special demurrers to the petition, and, plaintiffs declining to amend, the suit was dismissed. The defendant, the city of Austin, is shown by the averments of the petition to be a municipal corporation; and it is sought to make it liable to the father and mother for negligence of the city, resulting in the death of their son. The question involved arises upon the statute authorizing an action for actual damages by the parents of any person whose death is caused by the wrongful act, negligence, unskillfulness, or default of another. Rev. St. 1879, art. 2899. It was decided by this court in the case of Ritz v. City of Austin, 1 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 20 S. W. 1029, that such a suit would not lie against a municipal city corporation. The supreme court refused a writ of error in that case. In a later case the supreme court held that such a suit was maintainable against a private corporation (Fleming v. Loan Agency, 87 Tex. 238, 27 S. W. 126); but, as we understand the court, it approved the result of the case decided by this court. The court distinguishes between a private and a municipal corporation. We believe the case last cited settles the law of the case at bar adversely to the appellants, and the judgment of the lower court is affirmed. Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Dallas v. Halford
...to cases in which no recovery can be had for actual damages. Ritz v. City of Austin, 1 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 20 S. W. 1029; Searight v. City of Austin, 42 S. W. 857; Elliott v. City of Brownwood, 166 S. W. 932; Elliott v. City of Brownwood, 106 Tex. 292, 166 S. W. It is urged by appellee that......
-
Schaff v. Ridlehuber
...servants. It was held by the Court of Civil Appeals, in Ritz v. City of Austin, 1 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 20 S. W. 1029, and in Searight v. City of Austin, 42 S. W. 857, that the word "another" in section 2 of said article meant another person, and did not include a corporation. Writs of error ......
-
Harris County Drainage Dist. No. 12 v. City of Houston, 1100-5344.
...Austin, 1 Tex. Civ. App. 455, 20 S. W. 1029; Fleming v. Texas Loan Agency, 87 Tex. 238, 27 S. W. 126, 26 L. R. A. 250; Searight v. Austin [Tex. Civ. App.] 42 S. W. 857; Elliott v. Brownwood, 106 Tex. 292, 166 S. W. 1129; Id. [Tex. Civ. App.] 166 S. W. 932; City of Dallas v. Halford [Tex. Ci......
-
City of Tyler v. Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'n
...corporation, and the statute was treated as though it had expressly named private corporations. And afterwards, in Searight v. City of Austin (Tex. Civ. App.) 42 S. W. 857, it was held the statute did not apply where death was caused by the negligence or wrongful act of a municipal corporat......