Legal Opinion

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Williams

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided April 17, 1917No. 1777PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The jury were not authorized by the charge to find for appellee, unless they did so in accordance with instructions as follows:

"If you believe from the evidence that on or about the 6th day of November, 1915, as alleged in plaintiff's petition, Ike Williams, the plaintiff, was engaged in the operation of a planing machine for the defendant, and that the equipment of said machine was defective in not being equipped with a slow feed, and if you believe that it was negligence on the part of defendant to furnish the machine to plaintiff to do the work then at hand in such defective condition, if…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. International & Great Northern Railway Co. v. SeinTexas Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Kettler Brass Manufacturing Co. v. O'NeilCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1909
  3. Paris & G. N. R. v. FlandersTexas Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Sickles v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1896
  5. Southwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Chase Bag Co. v. LongoriaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
  2. Baker v. StreaterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
  3. Houston, E. & W. T. Ry. Co. v. JackmanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1919
  4. Texas Electric Ry. v. WhitmoreCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API