French v. Grigsby

Texas Supreme Court

French v. Grigsby

571 S.W.2d 867

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 4, 1978

DocketB-7810

StatusPublished

Cited by36 cases

This text of 571 S.W.2d 867 (French v. Grigsby) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

French v. Grigsby, 571 S.W.2d 867 (Tex. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Judgment was rendered for plaintiff on the jury verdict in this suit for damages sustained when plaintiff’s motorcycle struck defendant’s automobile which turned across plaintiff’s traffic lane. The court of civil appeals affirmed. 567 S.W.2d 604.

Defendant complains of the trial court’s refusal to submit his requested issues tendering the theory of last clear chance. We agree with the holding of the court of civil appeals that the trial court did not err in this refusal. Since the advent of comparative negligence with the adoption of Art. 2212a, Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann., this Court has sought to abolish those doctrines directed to the old choice between total victory and total defeat for the injured plaintiff. Davila v. Sanders, 557 S.W.2d 770 (Tex.1977). The doctrine of last clear chance or discovered peril fits that category and it is abolished as an issue or instruction.

The application for writ of error is refused, no reversible error.

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

PER CURIAM.

Judgment was rendered for plaintiff on the jury verdict in this suit for damages sustained when plaintiff’s motorcycle struck defendant’s automobile which turned across plaintiff’s traffic lane. The court of civil appeals affirmed. 567 S.W.2d 604.

Defendant complains of the trial court’s refusal to submit his requested issues tendering the theory of last clear chance. We agree with the holding of the court of civil appeals that the trial court did not err in this refusal. Since the advent of comparative negligence with the adoption of Art. 2212a, Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann., this Court has sought to abolish those doctrines directed to the old choice between total victory and total defeat for the injured plaintiff. Davila v. Sanders, 557 S.W.2d 770 (Tex.1977). The doctrine of last clear chance or discovered peril fits that category and it is abolished as an issue or instruction.

The application for writ of error is refused, no reversible error.

Nabors Well Services, Ltd. F/K/A Pool Company Texas, Ltd. and Lauro Bernal Garcia v. Asuncion Romero, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Aydee Romero, and as Next Friend of Edgar Romero and Saul Romero Esperanza Soto, Individually and as Next Friend of Esperanza Soto, Guadalupe Soto, Maria Elena Soto And Marti

Texas Supreme Court, 2015

Nabors Well Services, Ltd. v. Romero

456 S.W.3d 553 (Texas Supreme Court, 2015)

Del Lago Partners, Inc. v. Smith

307 S.W.3d 762 (Texas Supreme Court, 2010)

General Electric Co. v. Moritz

257 S.W.3d 211 (Texas Supreme Court, 2008)

General Electric Company v. Arthur Lee Moritz

Texas Supreme Court, 2008

Hawkins v. Walker