Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Gonzalez v. Layton

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided May 31, 1968No. 358Published

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

  1. Finnerty v. DarbySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  2. State v. ClaytonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Wilder v. CadleCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
  4. Rose v. EdmondsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1937
  5. Collier v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1947

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

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

Powered by the Exa API