Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Griffin

• Decision Date: 11 March 1890
• Citation: 13 S.W. 471
• Court: Texas Supreme Court
• Parties: TEXAS & P. RY. CO. <I>v.</I> GRIFFIN <I>et al.</I>

13 S.W. 471

TEXAS & P. RY. CO.v.

GRIFFIN et al.

Supreme Court of Texas.

March 11, 1890.

Appeal from district court, Marion county.

F. H. Prendergast, for appellant. C. A. Culbertson, for appellees.

STAYTON, C. J.

Griffin was injured in January, 1888, by the negligence of the servants of John S. Brown, receiver of Texas & Pacific Railway. In March, 1888, he filed suit against receiver in district court, Marion county, and on June 22, 1888, recovered a judgment for $4,400. Brown appealed, and this court affirmed the judgment. Griffin sold one-half of the judgment to Loony, Mason, and Culberson. On December 12, 1888, these four persons sued the Texas & Pacific Railway Company in the district court, Marion county, on the judgment. On January 21, 1888, they recovered a judgment against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company for $4,605, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

The same defenses were set up by the railway company that were in the case of Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Johnson, ante, 463, (this term decided;) and the petition of the receiver asking discharge, as well as the orders of the court made therein, offered in evidence in that case, were offered in evidence in this. It was further found in this case that, during the time the railway was in the hands of the receiver, he expended, under the orders of the court that appointed him, in making permanent improvements on the road, from the net earnings, more than $2,300,000. The character of improvements made are stated in the opinion in the case before referred to.

Assignments of error are: "The court erred in rendering judgment against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company, because the evidence showed that the plaintiff, Griffin, was injured while the Texas & Pacific Railway was under the control of John C. Brown, as receiver, and by the acts of the employes of said receiver. Said road was not under the control of the Texas & Pacific Railway Company. The court erred in rendering judgment against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company, because there are no facts making the Texas & Pacific Railway Company liable for the acts of the employes of said Brown as receiver. The court erred in rendering judgment against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company, because, under the orders discharging Brown from his receivership, this court has no jurisdiction to determine whether the Texas & Pacific Railway Company are liable for the damage caused by the receiver while operating the railway; and, under said...