Floyd v. Organ

359 S.W.2d 190, 1962 Tex. App. LEXIS 2628
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 11, 1962
Docket10985
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 359 S.W.2d 190 (Floyd v. Organ) 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
Floyd v. Organ, 359 S.W.2d 190, 1962 Tex. App. LEXIS 2628 (Tex. Ct. App. 1962).

Opinion

HUGHES, Justice.

Appellant, Betty Lee Floyd, 1 is the two-year old daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Waynt Floyd. On September 30, 1959, she and her mother, and perhaps her father, were sitting in the family car parked on the Travis County dump ground where Mr. Floyd was "burning out some salvage wire and motors.” While Betty Lee and her mother, and possibly the father, were in their car, a City of Austin garbage truck, driven by appellee, Henry Homer Organ, Jr., collided with the Floyd car injuring Betty Lee, her father and mother.

The case was tried to a jury which convicted appellee of negligence, found that the reasonable amount of the necessary medical expenses incurred before the trial as a direct and proximate result of the injuries sustained by Betty Lee on the occasion in suit to be $146.75, but found that she sustained no monetary damages from such injuries.

The single point of error presented is that the finding of the jury denying Betty Lee damages for her injuries is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence. We sustain this point.

Perry Hurd, a witness for appellant, testified that he was present when the garbage truck collided with the Floyd car, and concerning Betty Lee testified:

“Q. Where was the little girl?
“A. She was in the car, kind of tied up in the dash, or wheel, or something.
“Q. Did she appear to be injured?
“A. She was.
“Q. Will you describe her condition for us?
“A. Well, roughly, her teeth looked like her gums were bleeding pretty bad. There was so much blood I couldn’t tell exactly.
“Q. Was she crying or unconscious ?
“A. She was kind of out at that time.”

This witness conveyed Mr. Floyd and his daughter to the hospital, and regarding the condition of the child enroute testified :

“Q. What was her condition on the way to the hospital there?
“A. Well, at first she was kind of out, I would say, and she was bleeding pretty bad, and I disremember whether he taken his shirt or his other shirt and tried to stop some of the blood, and before we got into town, of course, she came to.
*192 Q. Did she have any difficulty there in the truck?
“A. Well, she was kind ot struggling from so much blood.”

On cross examination, Mr. Hurd testified:

“Q. Where was the blood coming from on this little girl?
“A. Well, it looked like to me it was coming out of her gums under her lip somewhere.
“Q. It was from a cut on the mouth ?
“A. It was from a cut somewhere.”
Appellant’s father gave the following testimony regarding her injuries:
“Q. How was your little girl hurt?
“A. Well, sir, she had an injury on her forehead and a smaller injury to her mouth.
“Q. Was she conscious or unconscious ?
“A. Well, she was unconscious when I remember holding her.
buo ⅞ gf o> o i? 5? ⅞ * o o ⅝ at ⅜ *
“A. Well, naturally, she had a cut on her head, and she had soreness and complained of headaches, as a child would, * * * I mean I ain’t saying it is me or someone else; I mean just as a child, you know, crying with it.
“Q. Did it affect her any as to her emotional state, or anything of that kind ?
“A. Yes, sir.
“Q. How was that?
“A. Well, sir, when she seen a City garbage truck, she went into hysterics.
Q. How long did that last?
“A. Over a period of months.
* * * * * *
“Q. All right. Does she have a scar from the cut?
“A. Yes, sir.
“Q. Where is it?
“A. On her forehead right there under the hairline.
“Q. Could you describe it just briefly ?
“A. Well, sir, it is just a scar an inch or so long on the forehead, and the stitch marks still show on it.
“Q. You mean the cross-marks?
“A. Yes, sir.”

On cross examination Mr. Floyd having testified that Betty Lee was, at the time of trial, four years old, two years having elapsed since her injuries, testified:

“Q. And that scar has just about disappeared, hasn’t it?
“A. No, sir.
Q. Well, it is not a disfiguring scar, is it?
“A. Well I couldn’t state what disfiguring meant.”

Dr. John Garcia, who gave Betty Lee emergency treatment at Brackenridge Hospital shortly after she sustained injury, testified:

“A. We saw Betty Floyd in the emergency room at Brackenridge Hospital.
“Q. All right. What was her condition at the time you saw her?
“A. Well, we had been called down to see her because she had been in an automobile accident. When we saw her, she was bleeding profusely from a laceration over her left eye *193 brow, a little bit higher than the eyebrow.
“Q. All right. What examination did you perform at that time and what were your findings?
“A. Our examination was complete.

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

Related

Baird v. Bell Helicopter Textron
491 F. Supp. 1129 (N.D. Texas, 1980)
Gallegos v. Clegg
417 S.W.2d 347 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1967)
Qualls v. Miller
414 S.W.2d 746 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1967)
Edmondson v. Keller
401 S.W.2d 718 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
359 S.W.2d 190, 1962 Tex. App. LEXIS 2628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/floyd-v-organ-texapp-1962.