Legal Opinion

St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v. Gross

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 21, 1925No. 3006PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WILLSON, O. J.

(after stating the facts as above). [1, 2] In his charge the trial court told the jury to find for appellees, other conditions specified concurring, if they believed from the evidence that appellant’s employes in control of the train “ran same at a dangerous and excessive rate of speed,’’ or negligently “failed to keep a lookout,” as the train approached the place where the accident occurred. The instruction was objected to on the ground (among others, none of which we regard as tenable) that the testimony did not warrant a finding of liability on appellant’s part because of the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Lancaster v. FitchTexas Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Panhandle & S. F. Ry. Co. v. HaywoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
  3. Panhandle & S. F. Ry. Co. v. LairdCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
  4. Schaff v. RidlehuberCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1923
  5. Texarkana & Ft. S. Ry. Co. v. La VelleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Clary v. Morgan Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API