Legal Opinion

International & Great Northern Railroad v. Telephone & Telegraph Co.

Texas Supreme Court

Decided December 1, 1887No. 5482PublishedCited by 18 opinions

Appeal from Hays. Tried below before the Hon. L. W. Moore. The opinion states all that is necessary to its proper understanding except the following: A witness, Brackenridge, was allowed to detail to the jury, over the objections of defendant, the following conversation had by him with, J. K. Painter, an employe of defendant: “Mr. Painter said the poles were on the railroad right of way, and that I must remove them.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Hays. Tried below before the Hon. L. W. Moore. The opinion states all that is necessary to its proper understanding except the following: A witness, Brackenridge, was allowed to detail to the jury, over the objections of defendant, the following conversation had by him with, J. K. Painter, an employe of defendant: “Mr. Painter said the poles were on the railroad right of way, and that I must remove them. I said I did not think they were on the right of way; that I had instructed my foreman not to erect any poles on the railroad right of way, and that I wanted a few day» in which…

1Opinion of the Court

Gaines, Associate Justice.

This was an action brought in the court below by the appellee against the appellant to recover damages, actual and exemplary, for the destruction by appellant’s agents and servants, of a portion of appellee’s telegraph and telephone line.

The first question presented is raised by the assignment that! the court erred in overruling appellant’s exception to so much o£ the petition as sought to recover exemplary damages. The plaintiff sued as a corporation; and appellee contends that a corporation can, in an action of this sort, recover only actual damages. In their…

2Cited by18 opinions

  1. Chronister Lumber Co. v. WilliamsTexas Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Conklin v. Consolidated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  3. De Celles v. CaseyMontana Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Plotnik v. RosenbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
  5. Flannery v. WoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903

13 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