Fernandez v. Kiesling
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Dissent
CADENA, Justice.
I do not agree that prior Texas decisions establish the “rule” that it is proper to instruct the jury that, in order to find that a passenger in an automobile is not a “guest” withing the meaning of our guest statute, Article 6701b, Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann., it is necessary to find that the compensation *937paid by the passenger was the motivating cause for furnishing the transportation. The prior Texas decisions do not establish such a rule simply because they have not previously considered the problem to which the majority opinion holds such “rule” applicable.
The instant case is…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Burt v. LochausenTexas Supreme Court · 1952
- McCann v. HoffmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Raub v. RoweCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1938
- Whitmore v. FrenchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Rogers v. VreelandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.