Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Bryant
Court of Appeals of Texas
Appeal from Tarrant. Tried below before Hon. S. P. Greene. The charge of the court was error, because it confounds the distinction between an assumed risk and contributory negligence, to the prejudice of defendant, inasmuch as defendant’s contention is and was, that the hole in the platform was an obvious defect and apparently dangerous, and that its defective condition was known to plaintiff so as to preclude a recovery by him when he exposed himself to the danger,…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Tarrant. Tried below before Hon. S. P. Greene. The charge of the court was error, because it confounds the distinction between an assumed risk and contributory negligence, to the prejudice of defendant, inasmuch as defendant’s contention is and was, that the hole in the platform was an obvious defect and apparently dangerous, and that its defective condition was known to plaintiff so as to preclude a recovery by him when he exposed himself to the danger, irrespective of any negligence on his part. Green v. Railway, 79 Texas, 130; Somers v. Railway, 14 S. W. Rep., 779; Rogers v.…
1Opinion of the Court
TAELTON, Chiee Justice.
On and before October 20, 1890, the appellee was a brakeman in the employ of the appellant company. On the night of that day, while in the discharge of his duties, he was assisting in the unloading of freight on the platform of the depot of appellant, at Eastland, Texas, and fell into a hole, thereby sustaining-serious injuries.
To recover damages for these injuries he brought this suit, alleging negligence on the part of the defendant in permitting the hole on the platform of its depot, and in failing to keep the premises properly lighted. On December 12, 1892, he…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Green v. CrossTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. SomersTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Rogers v. Galveston City Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1890
- Texas Pacific Railway Co. v. OverheiserTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Texas & New Orleans Railway Co. v. ConroyTexas Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by10 opinions
- Ball v. GussenhovenMontana Supreme Court · 1904
- Mayo v. Fort Worth & D. C. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1921
- Pecos & N. T. Ry. Co. v. WinklerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Bier v. HosfordWashington Supreme Court · 1904
- Ft. Worth, & D. C. Ry. Co. v. SmithersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.