TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Dawkins v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co.

Mary E. Dawkins v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Company

Dawkins v. Gulf, Colo. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 13 S.W. 984 (Tex. 1890)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Texas Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 9, 1890
Docket
No. 6637
Judges
Henry
Citations
13 S.W. 98477 Tex. 2321890 Tex. LEXIS 1095
Headnotes
Damages—Negligence.—No damages can be recovered against a railway company for injury to a child, at the suit of the parent, inflicted while riding on a hand car furnished by the company for the exclusive use of its hands, when the child went upon the car to make the trip during which it was injured with the consent of the parent— no negligence or cause of injury being shown except that of permitting so young and inexperienced a child to ride on such a car.
Summary
Appeal from Brown. Tried below before Hon. J. 0. Randolph. The character of this case will be seen from the opinion, in connection with the opinion in The Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway v. Dallas Dawkins, ante, 228.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Henry

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

HENRY, Associate Justice.

—This suit involves the same facts as did the case of Dallas Dawkins against the same defendant, this day decided.

• Appellant is the mother of Dallas Dawkins, and sues for damages for expense of medical attention, and for nursing him, and loss of his services during minority.

*233 Judgment was rendered for the defendant upon the verdict of a jury.

Plaintiff, as a witness, testified that the child went upon the hand car to make the trip on her business, and with her knowledge and consent, lío negligence or cause of the injury is proved except that of permitting such a young and inexperienced child to ride on such a car.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Delivered May 9, 1890.

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