C., R.I. G. Ry. Co. v. Johnson

Appellant's third special charge could only have been given upon the theory that its negligence in blocking the crossing was not the proximate cause of appellee's injuries, and in reversing the case for the refusal of this charge the majority opinion has adopted that view of the law. The cases relied on by appellant to support this proposition are not decisive. In De La Pena v. International Great Northern R. Co., 32 Texas Civ. App. 241[32 Tex. Civ. App. 241], the plaintiff, finding the street crossing blockaded with cars, took a path running along the railroad's right of way for the purpose…