Legal Opinion

Luvual v. Henke & Pillot, Division of the Kroger Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided January 31, 1963No. 13924PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BELL, Chief Justice.

Appellant, J. W. Luvual, sued appellee to recover damages that resulted from injuries received by his wife, Ann, when an automobile in which she was riding was in collision with a truck belonging to Henke & Pillot which was being driven by Kinsey Whitfield, an agent of Henke & Pillot. Trial was to a jury and based on the jury verdict the court rendered judgment that plaintiff take nothing.

Appellant’s theory of recovery against Henke & Pillot was that Kinsey Whitfield as its agent, acting in the course and scope of his employment, was negligent and his negligence was a…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. In Re King's EstateTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Little Rock Furniture Manufacturing Co. v. DunnTexas Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Burt v. LochausenTexas Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Mundy v. Pirie-Slaughter Motor Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Seinsheimer v. BurkhartTexas Supreme Court · 1939

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Pitman v. Lightfoot, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)1996
  2. Estate of Arrington v. FieldsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1979
  3. Miller v. AlveyIndiana Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Bonelli v. Volkswagen of America, IncMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. City of Houston v. WatsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1964

33 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