Southern Pine Lumber Co. v. Andrade

• Decision Date: 08 February 1939
• Docket Number: No. 1763-7134.,1763-7134.
• Citation: 124 S.W.2d 334
• Parties: SOUTHERN PINE LUMBER CO. v. ANDRADE.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

Page 334

124 S.W.2d 334

SOUTHERN PINE LUMBER CO. v. ANDRADE.

No. 1763-7134.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section B.

February 8, 1939.

Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Ninth Supreme Judicial District.

Action by C. Andrade III against Southern Pine Lumber Company for damages for personal injuries. To review a judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals, 94 S. W.2d 583, reversing a judgment for defendant, the defendant brings error.

Judgment of Court of Civil Appeals reversed and judgment of trial court affirmed.

King Wood & Morrow and H. E. Cox, all of Houston, for plaintiff in error.

Adams & McAlister, of Nacogdoches, for defendant in error.

SMEDLEY, Commissioner.

Defendant in error, C. Andrade III, sued plaintiff in error, Southern Pine Lumber Company, for damages on account of personal injuries suffered by defendant in error in a collision of his automobile and a truck owned by plaintiff in error and driven by its employee. The jury in answer to special issues found: that the driver of plaintiff in error's truck negligently operated it on the left-hand side of the road; that such negligence was a proximate cause of defendant in error's injuries; that defendant in error was driving his automobile at a rate of speed in excess of 45 miles per hour; that the operation of defendant in error's automobile at such speed was a proximate cause of the collision; that defendant in error was operating his automobile at a greater rate of speed than a reasonably prudent person would have operated it under the same or similar circumstances; and that the operation of said automobile at such speed was a proximate cause of the collision. The jury answered "Nothing" to the issue: "What sum of money, if paid now in cash, will fairly and reasonably compensate plaintiff for the injuries sustained by him, if any, as a result of the collision?" The trial court's judgment on the verdict was that defendant in error take nothing by his suit.

The Court of Civil Appeals, although it found that the verdict of the jury convicting defendant in error of contributory negligence was supported by the evidence but not established as a matter of law, reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause, holding that, because the jury's answer that defendant in error suffered no damages was contrary to the undisputed evidence, the answer must have been induced by some improper influence, and further that it was reasonable to conclude that the same improper influence entered into the findings with respect to contributory negligence. 94 S.W.2d 583.

It is our opinion, after careful examination of the transcript, the statement of facts and the briefs, that the conclusion of the Court of Civil Appeals cannot be sustained. While there was conflict in the evidence as to the rate of speed at which defendant in error was driving his automobile immediately prior to the collision, the jury's findings, that he was driving at a rate of speed in excess of 45 miles per hour and at a greater rate of speed than a reasonably prudent person would have driven under the same or similar circumstances and that such negligent driving on the part of defendant in error was a proximate cause of the injuries, are well supported by substantial evidence. These findings of the jury, so supported, required the...