Legal Opinion

St. Louis, S. F. & T. Ry. Co. v. Morgan

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided March 25, 1920No. 2243PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWillson, C. J.

(after stating the facts as above). The findings of the jury that plaintiffs in error were guilty of negligence as specified in the statement above are attacked as erroneous because not warranted by evidence before them. But we think each of said findings had evidence to support it, unless it was the finding that the failure of the employés in charge of the engine to blow the whistle and ring the bell thereof as required by law was a proximate cause of the accident resulting in the death of T. L. Morgan. Whether that one was warranted by the testimony or not need not be determined, because,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. McGlamoryTexas Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Gulp, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. WagleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897
  3. International & Great Northern Railroad v. StarlingCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1897
  4. International & Great Northern Railroad v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1905

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Benoit v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Western Cotton Oil Co. v. MayesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1951
  3. Rhoades v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1926
  4. Langham v. TalbottCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1948
  5. St. Louis, S. F. & T. Ry. Co. v. HouzeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930

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