Talley v. Beever & Hindes
Court of Appeals of Texas
Error from the District Court of Erio. Tried below before Hon. E. E. Lane.
1Opinion of the Court
JAMES, Chief Justice.
Plaintiff, aged 17 at the time of injury, suing by his father and next friend, J. E. Talley, alleged in substance that Beever & Hindes, a partnership firm, sold to J. E. Talley a “pear burner,” a machine of their own manufacture, to be operated by the use of gasoline for the purpose of burning prickly pear on his ranch; that plaintiff while pumping air into the cylinder or tank containing the gasoline in order to form the gas, and while he was following directions for using the machine, the cylinder burst from the pressure of the gas within, and the gas expelled therefrom…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Thomas v. . WinchesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
- McCray v. Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1896
- Losee v. . CluteNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Peters v. Johnson, Jackson & Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1902
- Reiss v. New York Steam Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Defore v. Bourjois, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1958
- Jarecki Mfg. Co. v. HindsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
- Schwartz v. Volvo North America Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1989
- Lynn v. Glucose Sugar Refining Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1905
- General Motors Corporation v. Barbara June Muncy and Charles MuncyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.