Legal Opinion

Higginbotham v. Ritchie

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 19, 1963No. 16413PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MASSEY, Chief Justice.

In view of the rather confused state of the holdings relative to the doctrine of “sudden emergency” or “imminent peril” as recognized in Texas, we believe it advisable to first state our own interpretation of the law before passing upon the points of error presented by the appellant.

An approved definition is as follows : “ 'By the term “emergency”, as used in this charge, is meant a condition arising suddenly and unexpectedly and not proximately caused by any negligent act or omission of the person in question and which calls for immediate action on his part and without…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Goolsbee v. Texas & New Orleans RailroadTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Schroeder v. RainboldtTexas Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Beck v. BrowningTexas Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Dallas Ry. & Terminal Co. v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. DeLeon v. Pickens, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1996
  2. Tsugawa v. ReinartzHawaii Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Edward Taylor v. Carolyn Marie BairCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
  4. Oldham v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1993
  5. McCarty v. PurserCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1963

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API