Denison Cotton Mill Co. v. McAmis
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the CourtDevy, J.
(after stating the facts as above). It not appearing in the record that the refusal to give the requested peremptory instruction was excepted to, we cannot consider an assignment complaining of such refusal. Therefore the first and second assignments of error are overruled. Railway Co. v. Wilson, 176 S. W. 619.
By the third assignment of error it is contended that the defendant pleaded assumed risk as a defense, and such plea is not denied by plaintiff, and for that' reason the pleadings would not permit appellee to recover in the case. It has been decided that the defendant waived any right…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. TomlinsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
- Chicago, B. & Q. R. v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Tabet Bros. Co. v. HigginbothamCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
3Cited by14 opinions
- Dallas Railway & Terminal Co. v. StarlingTexas Supreme Court · 1937
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
- Southern Underwriters v. MoweryCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941
- Denison Cotton Mill Co. v. McAmisTexas Commission of Appeals · 1919
- Thorne v. DashiellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.