McNeal v. Home Ins. Co.

112 S.W.2d 339, 1937 Tex. App. LEXIS 1427
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 9, 1937
DocketNo. 10543.
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 112 S.W.2d 339 (McNeal v. Home Ins. Co.) 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
McNeal v. Home Ins. Co., 112 S.W.2d 339, 1937 Tex. App. LEXIS 1427 (Tex. Ct. App. 1937).

Opinion

GRAVES, Justice.

This suit was one by Mrs. McNeal, acting for herself and other members of her family, for damages for- the death of her husband, Clarence Clifford McNeal, from the collision of two automobiles going in opposite directions, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the insurance company’s servant while acting within the course of his employment for it. From an instructed verdict in favor of the insurance company, directed at the close of' her testimony, Mrs. McNeal has appealed.

In view of the fact that all the contributing facts and circumstances appear to have been undisputed, it is thought that the single question presented on the appeal may be thus stated:

Did the testimony in the record justify the trial judge in so directing the verdict against the appellants, upon the theory that, the evidence conclusively showed the ap-pellee’s servant, Joe Cummings, not to be acting within the scope of his employment for it at the time the appellant’s husband, Clarence Clifford McNeal, met his death as a result of the auto collision in question ?

Preliminarily to recitation of the testimony, this much of the underlying situation, just referred to as having been undisputed, may be given: (1) Joe Cummings was the agent of the appellee company, and was one among the three people killed in the acci *340 dent, including MeNeal; (2) that the automobile in which Cummings was riding at the time of the collision was the appellee’s property; (3) that when the accident occurred, Rogers Cypert, a IS year, old boy, was ■operating that car; (4) that he was negligently operating the car at the time and on the occasion of the accident.

What is thought to he a correct and sufficient résumé of the material testimony bearing upon the single question stated, supra, is thus taken from the appellees’ brief:

“The plaintiffs introduced as a witness Rogers Cypert, Jr., a boy fifteen years old living in Bay City who had known Joe Cummings about a month and a half before the accident in question, having met him in Wharton at Lewis’ Barbecue Stand. Cypert did not see Cummings again until Cummings came out to the Cotton Wood Inn (a night club) about 9:30 p. m. alone. There he contacted the young Cypert boy who introduced him to some of the boys and girls present at the inn. From that time on, Cypert and Cummings were together practically all the time until Cummings was killed in the accident to plaintiff’s deceased husband. Cummings had a pint bottle of sloe gin with about a drink and half in it on arriving at the Cotton Wood Inn. After spending about an hour at Cotton Wood Inn, Doris Gordon and a girl whose last name was Rice, Joe Cummings and Roger Cypert went to Bay City in the car driven by Cummings to get some more sloe gin. After which they returned to Cotton Wood Inn. Cummings asked the Cypert boy if he wanted to go some place and he replied that he did not care if he rode around awhile. Cummings then asked the Cypert boy, ‘Do you know any girls we can get to go with us?’ to which the Cypert boy replied, ‘We can ride by and get my sister and go some place and dance.’ Cummings and the Rice Girl and Cypert then left the Cotton Wood Inn and went to Boling, which is about 10 miles from the Cotton Wood Inn. The Cypert boy’s sister, Laverne, was working at a cafe at Boling right down in the heart of town.- They arrived in Boling somewhere in the neighborhood of twelve or one o’clock. ' Cypert’s sister was still working when they arrived, because the cafe did not close until 1:30 or 2:00. About 1:30 or 2:00 in the morning they left there, after getting Cypert’s sister tO' join them. As to the activities in Boling the Cypert boy says: ‘As to what we did in Bol'ing while we were waiting around for my sister, Mr. Cummings and this Rice girl never got out of the automobile at all. I went in the stand and I then bought some cigarettes and maybe drank a bottle of beer. I really and truly won’t say whether we bought some liquor in Boling or not. I don’t know.’ From Boling the party went to Wharton and drove to an Humble filling station and was informed by a boy working there that there had been a bad wreck on the other side of Hungerford at the Kendleton bridge. They decided to go and see that. As to whether or hot the party purchased any liquor at Boling, the Cypert boy says as follows, ‘We did not get anything to drink at Boling; I think we had some of the sloe gin. As to whether or not we got another bottle of liquor while at Boling, let me think a minute, and I will tell you in just a minute. I haven’t thought anything about it. My best recollection is that we didn’t buy any more whiskey after we left Bay City. We bought some sloe gin there; I won’t say for sure.’ Upon arriving at the Kendle-ton bridge they saw the place where the wreck had taken place but the wreck had already been taken away. It was about 2:30 a. m. From that point the party went to Rosenberg. Quoting from Cypert’s testimony: ‘We did not have any liquor in Rosenberg. I believe we still had some of that whiskey; we had some sloe gin that we might have bought in Boling, I don’t know.’ At the R & L Cafe in Rosenberg the party danced until 3:30 or 4:00 a. m. At the cafe they had a mechanical piano and a victrola. They all danced and had some drinks there. They drank a bottle or two of beer. Joe Cummings didn’t drive after the party left the Kendleton bridge. The Cypert boy took charge of the car at the Kendleton bridge and drove it until the party finally reached West Columbia, tie was also driving when the accident occurred. When the party left Rosenberg between 3:30 and 4:00 a. m., they went to West Columbia by way of Needville and Damon, some 34 miles on the ‘hug-the-coast’ highway. The party arrived' at West Columbia to the best judgment of the witness, Cypert, about a quarter to five. Upon arriving at West Columbia, Joe Cummings drove Cypert and his sister, Laverne, to the Edward’s Cafe and took the Rice girl home. The Cypert boy’s sister, Laverne, drove off with Gene Smith at 5 :00, Gene Smith having joined *341 the party at Rosenberg at the R & L Cafe, in his own automobile. However, Laverne did not get out of the car driven by Cummings and join the Smith boy until they reached West Columbia. Joe Cummings showed up, after taking the Rice girl home, at the Edward’s Cafe about 4:45 and picked up young Cypert and started out to follow Cypert’s sister, Laverne, and Gene Smith, who left for Boling. Cummings stopped the car about a mile out of town at the crossroad of Brazoria Highway and the ‘hug-the-coast’ highway, at which time young Cypert took over the car. Quoting the conversation between Cummings and the young Cypert boy, the Cypert boy says: ‘I don’t know whether I told him I would drive or not. Anyhow, when we got back in I started to drive.' I don’t know whether he asked me to drive, or whether he said he was too sleepy or — I believe it is; I don’t remember.’ Cummings and the young Cypert boy went along the highway, talking over the events of the night and while doing so the young Cypert boy drove the car off the edge of the highway and bent the right front fender on the wire on a bridge about two miles out of West Columbia. Mr. Cummings then told the Cypert boy to stop and he drove the car himself. Cummings while driving very fast and about half asleep, turned Merritt’s corner on two wheels. Merritt’s corner is wheré you turn off to go to Boling when traveling on the West Columbia-Bay City highway.

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

Related

Whiteman v. Harris
123 S.W.2d 699 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1938)
Renfro v. Elam
117 S.W.2d 133 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1938)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 S.W.2d 339, 1937 Tex. App. LEXIS 1427, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcneal-v-home-ins-co-texapp-1937.