I. & G. H. R'y Co. v. Irvine
Citations
- 64 Tex. 529
Syllabus
<p>1. Amendment — Limitation.— An amendment which differs from the original petition only in stating more fully the result of injuries caused by defendant, does not set up such a new cause of action as would let the statute of limitations run between the filing of the two petitions.</p> <p>2. Damages —Evidence.— In a damage suit for bodily injury, petitioner can allege the resulting necessity for a dissolution of a partnership of which he was a member, for the purpose of showing how far the injury disabled him from pursuing his ordinary occupation. If a plaintiff sought damages based upon such a dissolution, a question would arise as to the admissibility of evidence, and it would become necessary to decide whether the dissolution was the proximate result of the injury; but when he alleged the dissolution merely to show the extent to which he was disabled, no such question could arise.</p> <p>3. Passenger — Railway company. — In a suit against a railway company for damages, it was no error to charge that, “if defendant accepted plaintiff’s fare and allowed him to ride upon a freight train, he was a passenger within the meaning of the law, and defendant was bound by the same degree of care as though it was a passenger train.” Following Ohio & Miss. R’y Co. v. Dickerson, 59 Ind., 317, and other cases.</p> <p>4. Practice —Assignments op error. — Assignments that point out no particular error, and are but an invitation to the court to search the record for an error, are too general to be considered. The statute and rules made for the government of our courts declare that “ errors not so distinctly specified (as the rules require) shall be considered by the supreme court or court of appeals as waived.”</p> <p>5. Language op counsel — New trial.— Improper language of counsel should be presented in the motion for a new trial, in order to allow the court before which the matter transpired an opportunity of passing upon the question. The use of improper language in argument b
Judges: Stayton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.