Gonzalez v. Layton
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Concurrence
CONCURRING OPINION
SHARPE, Justice.
I concur in affirmance of the judgment for the reasons stated in this opinion.
I agree that appellants’ first and second points of error are without merit and should be overruled. The jury findings in answer to special issues 8 and 9 that appellant Beatrice Gonzalez failed to keep a proper lookout and that such failure was a proximate cause of the collision in question are not against the great weight and preponder-*221anee of the evidence as to be manifestly wrong and unjust. Appellants’ recovery herein was precluded only because of such unfavorable findings…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Finnerty v. DarbySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- State v. ClaytonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Wilder v. CadleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
- Rose v. EdmondsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1937
- Collier v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1947
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.