Wall v. Royal Indemnity Co.
Decision Date | 08 October 1927 |
Docket Number | (No. 11849.) |
Parties | WALL et al. v. ROYAL INDEMNITY CO. |
Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Young County; E. G. Thornton, Judge.
Suit by Mrs. Marvin C. Wall and others against the Royal Indemnity Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
Penix & Penix, of Graham, and John B. Rhea, of Wichita Falls, for appellants.
Davenport & Crain, of Wichita Falls, for appellee.
Mrs. Marvin C. Wall, surviving wife of Marvin C. Wall, deceased, instituted this suit for herself and minor children against the Royal Indemnity Company to recover insurance on a policy issued by the defendant to the Continental Oil Company, who, according to allegations in the petition, was an employer of Marvin C. Wall at the time of his death, and to whom the defendant had issued an insurance policy under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Law (Rev. St. 1925, arts. 8306-8309).
A general demurrer to plaintiffs' petition was sustained, and the plaintiffs having declined to amend, the suit was dismissed. This appeal is from those rulings, and the only question presented on this appeal is whether or not, as against a general demurrer, the plaintiffs' petition was sufficient to show a right of recovery.
The material facts alleged in the petition which, as against a general demurrer must be taken as true, are as follows: The defendant issued to the Continental Oil Company a policy of insurance as provided in the Workmen's Compensation Law. At the time the policy was issued, the Continental Oil Company was engaged in the business of oil production from leases held by it in Young county. After alleging the issuance of the policy by the defendant to the Continental Oil Company, and the fact that the latter company was a legally authorized subscriber to the Texas Employers' Insurance Association, the petition contains these further allegations:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Beem v. H. D. Lee Mercantile Co.
... ... Stores Co., 49 S.W.2d 205; Keithley v. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp., 49 S.W.2d 296; Wall v ... Royal Indemnity Co., 299 S.W. 319; Schraner v. Massman ... Const. Co., 48 S.W.2d 104 ... ...
-
Cisco & N. E. Ry. Co. v. Diefenderfer
...that specific allegations in a pleading, when ambiguous, are to be construed most strongly against the pleader. Wall v. Royal Indemnity Ins. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 299 S. W. 319; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Henry, 87 Tex. 165, 27 S. W. 63; Webb County v. Board of Trustees, 95 Tex. 131, 65 S. W.......
-
Shelton Motor Co. v. Higdon
...County v. Board of School Trustees, 95 Tex. 131, 65 S.W. 878; Pabst v. Roxana Pet. Corp., 125 Tex. 52, 80 S.W.2d 956; Wall v. Royal Ind. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 299 S.W. 319; Celli v. Sanderson, Tex.Civ.App., 207 S.W. 179; Meador v. Rudolph, Tex.Civ.App., 218 S. W. 520; Gillis v. Rosenheimer, 64......
-
Republic Production Co. v. Collins, 773.
...of that specific allegations in a pleading, when ambiguous, are to be construed most strongly against the pleader. Wall v. Royal Ind. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 299 S. W. 319; W. U. Tel. Co. v. Henry, 87 Tex. 165, 27 S. W. 63; Webb County v. Board of Trustees, 95 Tex. 131, 65 S. W. 878; Snipes et......