Montrief & Montrief v. Fort Worth Gas Co.
Texas Commission of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtLeddy, J.
Plaintiffs in error insist in their motion for rehearing that the judgment of the trial court in favor of Henry Bragg against them should be reversed and rendered because the undisputed evidence shows that they were not guilty of negligence, which was the proximate cause of the injury complained of. We are unable to agree with this contention. We think the question as to whether plaintiff in error’s negligence was a proximate cause of Bragg’s injuries, in the state of the evidence, was properly one for the jury.
It is further insisted that the judgment of the trial court should he affirmed as…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ormsby v. RatcliffeTexas Supreme Court · 1928
- Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. PriceTexas Commission of Appeals · 1922
- Bulin v. SmithTexas Commission of Appeals · 1928
- Kirby Lumber Company v. ConnTexas Supreme Court · 1924
- San Antonio Public Service Co. v. TracyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
3Cited by11 opinions
- International-Great Northern R. v. CaseyTexas Commission of Appeals · 1932
- Stone v. City of WylieTexas Commission of Appeals · 1931
- Dallas Hotel Co. v. DavisonTexas Commission of Appeals · 1930
- Dixie Motor Coach Corp. v. SwansonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Gordon v. McIntoshCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.