Legal Opinion

Heigel v. Wichita County

Texas Supreme Court

Decided April 22, 1892No. 7279PublishedCited by 58 opinions

Ho statement is necessary.

1Opinion of the Court

GAINES, Associate Justice.

— This suit was brought by appellant to recover of Wichita County damages for personal injuries caused by a defective bridge. A demurrer was sustained to the petition, and the plaintiff having declined to amend, the suit was dismissed.

The question presented seems hot to have been authoritatively decided in this court, though in The City of Galveston v. Posnainsky, 62 Texas, 118, it is held, that a city is liable under similar circumstances. But the opinion in that case recognizes the doctrine that a different rule applies as to counties. That cities may be made to…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. City of Galveston v. PosnainskyTexas Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Mower v. Inhabitants of LeicesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
  3. City of Detroit v. BlackebyMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
  4. Askew v. Hale CountySupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
  5. White v. Commissioners of ChowanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1884

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

3Cited by58 opinions

  1. Travis County v. Pelzel & Associates, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 2002
  2. San Antonio Independent School District v. McKinneyTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Bexar County v. LindenTexas Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Bennett v. Brown County Water Improvement District No. OneTexas Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Strickfaden v. Greencreek Highway DistrictIdaho Supreme Court · 1926

53 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