Legal Opinion

Southwestern Gas & Electric Co. v. Stanley

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided December 24, 1931No. 4124PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.

(after stating the case as above).

The appellant presents the point that the requested special instruction bearing upon the minimizing of damages was justified by the pleadings and evidence. It is contended that the damages which the appellee sues for could have been entirely avoided by paying the $111.48 .due for electricity supplied to the garage, and that the appellee was under the legal duty to appellant to do so. It is a fundamental rule that there can be no recovery for losses, whether arising under a breach of contract or tort, which might have been prevented or the consequences avoided…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. ZantzingerTexas Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Harvey v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  3. Texas Central Power Co. v. PerezCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. International Printing Pressmen & Assistants' Union v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Michael Holodnak v. Avco Corporation, Avco-Lycoming Division, Stratford, Connecticut,defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
  3. McDonough v. ZamoraCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1960
  4. Southwestern Gas & Electric Co. v. StanleyTexas Supreme Court · 1934
  5. International Printing Pressmen & Assitant's Union of North America v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 1946

10 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