Abeel v. Muse

Court of Appeals of Texas

Abeel v. Muse

136 S.W. 1198, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 1009

DecidedApril 26, 1911

StatusPublished

This text of 136 S.W. 1198 (Abeel v. Muse) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abeel v. Muse, 136 S.W. 1198, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 1009 (Tex. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

KEY, J.

This is a personal injury suit, and the second time that it has come to this court. A statement of the nature of the case will be found in the opinion of • Mr. Justice Rice in 124 S. W. 430. At the last trial the plaintiff recovered, and the defendant has appealed. The only question presented for decision is the contention that the undisputed testimony shows that the accident which caused appellee’s injury was a risk assumed by him as appellant’s employs, and that for that reason the trial court should have given a requested instruction directing a verdict for appellant, and, not having done so, should have set the verdict aside and awarded a new trial. We have read and considered the testimony, and have reached a conclusion adverse to the contention referred to. Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

KEY, J.

This is a personal injury suit, and the second time that it has come to this court. A statement of the nature of the case will be found in the opinion of • Mr. Justice Rice in 124 S. W. 430. At the last trial the plaintiff recovered, and the defendant has appealed. The only question presented for decision is the contention that the undisputed testimony shows that the accident which caused appellee’s injury was a risk assumed by him as appellant’s employs, and that for that reason the trial court should have given a requested instruction directing a verdict for appellant, and, not having done so, should have set the verdict aside and awarded a new trial. We have read and considered the testimony, and have reached a conclusion adverse to the contention referred to. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 S.W. 1198, 1911 Tex. App. LEXIS 1009, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abeel-v-muse-texapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack