Southland Greyhound Lines v. Dennison, 9849.
| Decision Date | 08 June 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 9849.,9849. |
| Citation | 62 S.W.2d 500 |
| Parties | SOUTHLAND GREYHOUND LINES, Inc., et al. v. DENNISON. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from County Court at Law, Harris County; Nat H. Davis, Judge.
Action by John Dennison against the Southland Greyhound Lines, Incorporated, and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Boyles, Scott & Fahey and Frank G. Dyer, all of Houston, for appellants.
Henderson & Copeland, of Houston, for appellee.
Under the disposition to be made of this cause no opinion is required of this court, but in deference to the able counsel for the parties who have so fully and considerately briefed and argued it here, this general statement of the grounds upon which an affirmance has been ordered is made:
The appealed-from decree allowed the appellee a $775 joint and several recovery against the appellants for personal injuries and medical services to himself, together with repair costs to his automobile, found by the jury, in answering special issues, to have been proximately caused by a collision in the city of Houston between the appellee's car and a bus belonging to the Greyhound Lines, which collision had been brought about by the negligence of the bus driver. In entering the judgment upon such verdict the court, among others, after decreeing a full recovery against the bus line, stated these findings: "And it further appearing to the Court that at the time and date of said collision said defendant, Southland Greyhound Lines, Inc., owned, and was actually operating said bus, mentioned in the evidence, in the prosecution of its business as a common-carrier over a definite and fixed route under and by virtue of a permit of convenience and necessity duly issued to it by the Railroad Commission of the State of Texas, under the laws of the State of Texas and the Rules and Regulations of the Railroad Commission of Texas in pursuance to such laws, and that in pursuance to such laws, rules and regulations said defendant, American Fidelity & Casualty Company of Richmond, Virginia, prior to the date of the collision in question had issued its policy of insurance No. 8163 to said defendant, Southland Greyhound Lines, Inc., and said defendant, Southland Greyhound Lines, Inc., had filed the same with the Railroad Commission of Texas, as provided by law, whereby said defendant, American Fidelity & Casualty Company of Richmond, Virginia, undertook, contracted, agreed, and primarily bound and obligated itself to pay to any judgment creditor or person obtaining any judgment against said defendant, Southland Greyhound Lines, Inc., all damages for personal injury or loss of, or damage to, property arising out of the operation of said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stambaugh v. Hayes
...as that phrase is legally defined. In such case it was not error to refuse to instruct on that issue, Southland Greyhound Lines et al. v. Dennison, Tex.Civ.App., 62 S.W.2d 500; Avra v. Karshner et al., 32 Ohio App. 492, 168 N.E. 237, though there is authority to the contrary, O'Connell v. H......
-
Younger Bros. v. Power
...29 S.W.2d 984; International-G. N. R. Co. v. Lucas, 128 Tex. 480, 99 S.W.2d 297, 301, 100 S.W. 2d 97; Southland Greyhound Lines v. Dennison, Tex.Civ.App., 62 S.W.2d 500; 45 Corpus Juris, 735, The same and similar considerations outweigh the urge for prejudicial error in the use of this expr......
-
Trapp v. Lampton
...R.S.; Rule 24 for District and County Courts; Camden Life Ins. Ass'n v. Clark, Tex.Civ.App., 69 S.W.2d 463; Southland Greyhound Lines v. Dennison, Tex.Civ.App., 62 S.W.2d 500. Furthermore, the pleas and exceptions mentioned were preceded by the defendant's general demurrer, and they were, t......