Texas and Pacific Railway Company v. Meeks
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion
On Motion for Rehearing
Appellee Meeks has filed an able motion for rehearing vigorously urging that we erred in holding there was no evidence of probative force showing that appellee’s perilous position was discovered by the employees of the railway company in time for them to have avoided the collision, and erred in holding that, as a matter of lawr the evidence viewed in its most favorable light to the verdict and the judgment did not raise the issue of discovered peril. In support of this contention, appellee points out testimony which he urges is inconsistent with and contrary to our…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ford v. Panhandle & Santa Fe Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1952
- Schumacher Co. v. PoseyTexas Supreme Court · 1948
- Cannady v. Dallas Ry. & Terminal Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1949
- Origen C. Hall v. National Supply Company and C. J. Overby and W. H. Bland, D/B/A Service Drilling Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Terry v. EnglishTexas Supreme Court · 1938
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.