Legal Opinion
Gulf Refining Co. v. Texarkana & Ft. S. Ry. Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided February 27, 1924No. 2853. [fn*]PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WILLSON; O. J.
(after stating the facts as above). Appellant’s contention that the trial court erred when he refused to instruct the jury to return a verdict in its favor is on the theory that it conclusively appeared from the testimony that the driver of the truck “was not [quoting] acting within the scope of his authority or employment or performing any service for it at the time the collision occurred.”
If it so appeared, of course the court erred as claimed; for, as was said in Railway Co. v. Kirk, 102 Ind. 399, 1 N. E. 849, 52 Am. Rep. 675:
“Where a servant steps aside from the master’s…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Ritchie v. WallerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
- Barmore v. Vicksburg, Shreveport & Pacific Railway Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1904
- Duffy v. HickeySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Tuttle v. DodgeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1922
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co. v. KirkIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. QuickMississippi Supreme Court · 1933
- Ineeda Laundry v. NewtonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Heintz v. Iowa Packing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1936
- John O'Shea v. Anthony J. Welch, and American Drug Stores, Inc., Doing Business as Osco Drug, Farmers Insurance Company, Inc., Defendant-IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Orris v. Tolerton & Warfield Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1926
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.