MacKay Telegraph & Cable Co. v. Martin

Court of Appeals of Texas

MacKay Telegraph & Cable Co. v. Martin

218 S.W. 133, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 48

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedJanuary 28, 1920

DocketNo. 2177. [fn*]

StatusPublished

This text of 218 S.W. 133 (MacKay Telegraph & Cable Co. v. Martin) 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

MacKay Telegraph & Cable Co. v. Martin, 218 S.W. 133, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 48 (Tex. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

DEYY, J.

(after stating tbe facts as above). A peremptory instruction asked by tbe appellant was refused by tbe court, and error is predicated upon tbe ruling of tbe court. It is believed there was error in refusing tbe requested instruction, for, according to tbe evidence, tbe death message was an interstate message sent from Rosedale, Miss., to Paris, Tex., and as such was interstate commerce. And tbe laws of Mississippi where tbe message originated do not allow, according to tbe admitted facts, a recovery of damages for mental anguish alone as relied on in this pase. Communication by telegraph is commerce, and messages passing from one state to another constitute such, commerce. Tel. Co. v. Pendleton, 122 U. S. 347, 7 Sup. Ct. 1126, 30 L. Ed. 1187. And as there was to be a continuous .transmission of tbe message in evidence from Rosedale, Miss., to Paris, Tex., tbe message was subject-matter of interstate commerce when tbe Mackay Company, as one of tbe agencies, undertook to further its transmission to tbe point of destination. Houston Navigation Co. v. Ins. Co., 89 Tex. 1, 32 S. W. 889, 30 L. R. A. 713, 59 Am. St Rep. 17. Since tbe message is interstate, and tbe Mackay Company is merely one of tbe agencies emplpyed in tbe furthering of tbe prompt transmission of tbe message, tbe liability of tbe Mackay *135 Company would be determined, it is thought, by the law of the state where the original contract was -made. In this state the question is settled that the contract is controlled by the laws of the state where it is made. Tel. Co. v. Douglass, 104 Tex. 66, 133 S. W. 877; Tel. Co. v. Bailey, 184 S. W. 519; Id., 108 Tex. 427, 196 S. W. 516.

The judgment is reversed, and a judgment is here rendered in favor of the appellant.

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

DEYY, J.

(after stating tbe facts as above). A peremptory instruction asked by tbe appellant was refused by tbe court, and error is predicated upon tbe ruling of tbe court. It is believed there was error in refusing tbe requested instruction, for, according to tbe evidence, tbe death message was an interstate message sent from Rosedale, Miss., to Paris, Tex., and as such was interstate commerce. And tbe laws of Mississippi where tbe message originated do not allow, according to tbe admitted facts, a recovery of damages for mental anguish alone as relied on in this pase. Communication by telegraph is commerce, and messages passing from one state to another constitute such, commerce. Tel. Co. v. Pendleton, 122 U. S. 347, 7 Sup. Ct. 1126, 30 L. Ed. 1187. And as there was to be a continuous .transmission of tbe message in evidence from Rosedale, Miss., to Paris, Tex., tbe message was subject-matter of interstate commerce when tbe Mackay Company, as one of tbe agencies, undertook to further its transmission to tbe point of destination. Houston Navigation Co. v. Ins. Co., 89 Tex. 1, 32 S. W. 889, 30 L. R. A. 713, 59 Am. St Rep. 17. Since tbe message is interstate, and tbe Mackay Company is merely one of tbe agencies emplpyed in tbe furthering of tbe prompt transmission of tbe message, tbe liability of tbe Mackay *135 Company would be determined, it is thought, by the law of the state where the original contract was -made. In this state the question is settled that the contract is controlled by the laws of the state where it is made. Tel. Co. v. Douglass, 104 Tex. 66, 133 S. W. 877; Tel. Co. v. Bailey, 184 S. W. 519; Id., 108 Tex. 427, 196 S. W. 516.

The judgment is reversed, and a judgment is here rendered in favor of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

218 S.W. 133, 1920 Tex. App. LEXIS 48, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mackay-telegraph-cable-co-v-martin-texapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack