Saenz v. Hinojosa

Court of Appeals of Texas

Saenz v. Hinojosa

268 S.W.2d 476, 1954 Tex. App. LEXIS 2567

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedMay 19, 1954

Docket12687

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 268 S.W.2d 476 (Saenz v. Hinojosa) 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

Saenz v. Hinojosa, 268 S.W.2d 476, 1954 Tex. App. LEXIS 2567 (Tex. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

POPE, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order overruling Aaron Saenz’ plea of privilege to be sued in Nueces -County.

Because the appellees have filed no brief, we accept the statements in appellant’s brief as correct. Rule 419, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Appellant -complains that there was no competent proof that Homero Hinojosa and his wife were injured by reason of the collision between their vehicle and appellant’s automobile. Only one witness testified on the trial. He was a deputy - sheriff, who arrived at the scene of the accident after it had occurred. He gained his knowledge of the collision either from observation of the scene of the accident or from hearsay statements. The witness testified with regard to the location of the two vehicles, as he saw them after the accident, but he failed to testify or prove that the plaintiffs’ injuries were suffered in the collision with the vehicle driven by Saenz. Eye witnesses that were available, including Mr. and Mrs. Hinojosa themselves, failed to testify. *477 “Presumptions are indulged in only to supply facts, and do not arise where the facts are known. Presumptions must be' based on some necessity, and the court will not go into the domain of presumptions where direct proof can he obtained.” 31 C.J.S., Evidence, § 114; Miller & Miller Motor Freight Lines v. Hunt, Tex.Civ.App., 242 S.W.2d 919.

The evidence is also lacking in proof of other essentials, under Vernon’s Ann.'Civ. St. § 9a, art. 1995, which appellees relied upon. The judgment is reversed and the cause ordered transferred to Nueces 'County in accordance with the provisions of Rule 89, T.R.C.P.

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

POPE, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order overruling Aaron Saenz’ plea of privilege to be sued in Nueces -County.

Because the appellees have filed no brief, we accept the statements in appellant’s brief as correct. Rule 419, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Appellant -complains that there was no competent proof that Homero Hinojosa and his wife were injured by reason of the collision between their vehicle and appellant’s automobile. Only one witness testified on the trial. He was a deputy - sheriff, who arrived at the scene of the accident after it had occurred. He gained his knowledge of the collision either from observation of the scene of the accident or from hearsay statements. The witness testified with regard to the location of the two vehicles, as he saw them after the accident, but he failed to testify or prove that the plaintiffs’ injuries were suffered in the collision with the vehicle driven by Saenz. Eye witnesses that were available, including Mr. and Mrs. Hinojosa themselves, failed to testify. *477 “Presumptions are indulged in only to supply facts, and do not arise where the facts are known. Presumptions must be' based on some necessity, and the court will not go into the domain of presumptions where direct proof can he obtained.” 31 C.J.S., Evidence, § 114; Miller & Miller Motor Freight Lines v. Hunt, Tex.Civ.App., 242 S.W.2d 919.

The evidence is also lacking in proof of other essentials, under Vernon’s Ann.'Civ. St. § 9a, art. 1995, which appellees relied upon. The judgment is reversed and the cause ordered transferred to Nueces 'County in accordance with the provisions of Rule 89, T.R.C.P.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 S.W.2d 476, 1954 Tex. App. LEXIS 2567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saenz-v-hinojosa-texapp-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack