TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Graves v. San Antonio & A. P. Ry. Co.

GRAVES Et Al. v. SAN ANTONIO & A. P. RY. CO.

Graves v. San Antonio & A. P. Ry. Co., 164 S.W. 1059 (Tex. App. 1914)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Texas · State Appellate Courts
Decided
January 28, 1914
Judges
Jenkins
Citations
164 S.W. 10591914 Tex. App. LEXIS 1286

Opinion of the Court — Jenkins

JENKINS, J.

Appellants brought this suit against appellee to recover damages on account of the death of W. B. Graves, a son of appellant Charles Graves. They alleged that W. B. Graves was an employe of appel-lee, and, while engaged in cleaning an engine, the boiler blew up and injured him, causing his death; that such injury was caused by the negligence of appellee in putting the deceased to work on an engine that was old, rusty, and unsafe. The allegations that the engine was old and rusty are immaterial, unless it be shown that by reason of such age and rust the boiler was in a defective or unsafe condition. There was no evidence in the case that said engine or boiler was unsafe, and no evidence as to the cause of explosion. The evidence was sufficient to raise the issue as to the engine’s being old, but not that it or the boiler was unsafe.

The trial court instructed a verdict for the defendant. In this there was no error. Appellants have assigned error on the refusal of the court to allow'' Charles Graves to testify as to what the deceased told him shortly after receiving the injury. The only, thing appearing in the record with reference to this matter is that the statement of facts set out what Charles Graves testified to on voir dire in the absence of the jury; but there is nothing to show that appellants offered this testimony to the jury, that the court refused to allow it to go to the jury, or, if so, that appellants excepted to the ruling of the court, for which reason this assignment must be overruled.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list