Houston & Texas Central Railway Co. v. Taylor

49 S.W. 1055, 20 Tex. Civ. App. 654, 1899 Tex. App. LEXIS 238
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 8, 1899
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 49 S.W. 1055 (Houston & Texas Central Railway Co. v. Taylor) 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
Houston & Texas Central Railway Co. v. Taylor, 49 S.W. 1055, 20 Tex. Civ. App. 654, 1899 Tex. App. LEXIS 238 (Tex. Ct. App. 1899).

Opinion

*655 KEY, Associate Justice.

This is a personal injury damage suit, resulting in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. But one question is presented in this court. The plaintiff with his family was traveling in a wagon along a public road. For a certain distance this road and the railroad track ran parallel and near each other. There was a freight train on the track, from whose engine steam escaped arid frightened the plaintiff’s team, causing them to turn into a ditch and injure his wife.

According to the testimony of the plaintiff and his wife the engine was was standing still when the wagon approached it, and the engineer and fireman acted as if the steam was caused to escape for the sole purpose of frightening the team; and in view of this evidence appellant contends that the acts complained of were the willful acts of the servants, not in furtherance of the master’s business, and for which the master is not liable.

There was other testimony, especially that submitted by appellant, tending to show that the train was moving at the time, and that the acts complained of were -done in furtherance of the master’s business; and also, that there was no negligence on the part of the engineer and fireman.

The jury were not compelled to credit all the testimony of any witness or reject it all. They had the right to make due allowance for the interest and zeal of the witnesses, and to reach the conclusion that the engineer and fireman were guilty of negligence while starting or moving the engine.

Judgment affirmed.

Writ of error refused.

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

Related

Texas Workers' Compensation Commission v. Garcia
893 S.W.2d 504 (Texas Supreme Court, 1995)
City National Bank v. City of Bridgeport
147 A. 181 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1929)
Chapman v. Head
5 S.W.2d 1001 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1928)
Arbaugh v. Robinson
286 S.W. 339 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1926)
McAdoo v. Campbell
224 S.W. 784 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1920)
Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co. v. Lynch
185 S.W. 362 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1916)
Houston Belt & Terminal Ry. Co. v. Vogel
179 S.W. 268 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 S.W. 1055, 20 Tex. Civ. App. 654, 1899 Tex. App. LEXIS 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houston-texas-central-railway-co-v-taylor-texapp-1899.