[Clipping: Chicago, Rock Island, and Gulf Railway Company v. Martin. No. 12422] Part: 1 of 6
207-212 p. ; 25 x 15 cm.View a full description of this clipping.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
CHICAGO, R. I. & G.
37 S.W
sonable time so to do, on condition that the
.ands would be conveyed to him, but that ap-
pellee failed and refused to comply with its
obligation to have the lands conveyed to him.
As the evidence was conflicting on the issue
of waiver, the respective contentions of the
l)arties should have been submitted to the
jury-for, if the facts are found as contended
b7y appellee, waiver of notice resulted as a
matter of law [see Farmers etc. v. Head (Tex.
Com. App.) .7 S.W.(2d) 61]; but, if found as
contended by appellant, waiver would not
have resulted. We are of opinion, therefore,
-hat the case should have been submitted on
hese issues, (1) whether appellee gave ap-
pellant notice of the dishonor of the instru-
nent, as required by statute, and (2) the re-
spective theories of the parties on the issue
of waiver by appellant of the notice of dis-
honor. The case will therefore be reversed
and remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
CHICAGO, R. 1. & G. RY. CO. v. MARTIN.
No. 12422.
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Fort Worth.
Jan. 31, 1931.
I. Waters and water courses I178(2).
Damage to land from overflow was differ-
ance in value of land before and after flood-
Mg.
2. Trial (9352(I).
In action against railroad for damages
prom overflow, issue on damages held errone-
)us as too broad and as not setting up cer-
ain standard.
Issue merely told jury to state what
amount of damages, if any, plaintiff suffer-
ed to land in question during a certain
period by reason of the overflow of water
from a certain creek, and was too broad
in permitting jury to include all damages
done to plaintiff's land resulting from such
overflowing water, since the evidence
showed that defendant was not the cause
of all or the full extent of the overflows,
and further because the issue did not sub-
mit any proper measure of damages, but
permitted the jury to measure the damag-
es by any standard it saw fit.
3. Waters and water courses 171 (I).
Railroad was only liable for that portion
of injury from overflow on plaintiff's land'
proximately caused by waters impeded by
railroad.RY. CO. v. MARTIN Tex. 207
W.(2d)
4. Waters and water courses X171 (I).
If rains would have caused overflow on
plaintiff's land irrespective of railroad's neg-
ligence, and railroad's negligence merely
caused additional unascertainable damages,
railroad would not be liable,
5. Waters and water courses 0171 (2).
Railroad need only use due care to pro-
vide embankments and causeways for escape
of flood waters as from history of country
and other circumstances could reasonably be
then seen.
6. Evidence fi 474(18).
Owner suing railroad for damages from
overflow held not qualified to testify coneer--
ing value of land under facts.
Facts showed that owner testified tha
he was only acquainted with the present
market value of the land, and knew of
sales of land in the vicinity only what he
was told by parties interested in such
sales.
7. Trial ('350(5).
Railroad sued for damages from overflow
was entitled to issue presenting its defense
that high waters of river caused overflow.
8. Trial 0350(3).
Railroad sued for damages from overflow
held entitled to issue whether previous over-
flows rendered plaintiff's land more valuable
for pasturage than tillable purposes.
Evidence tended to show that no more
than 25 acres of the land in controversy
was ever cultivated, and that the last at-
tempt to cultivate this 25 acres was in
1926, from which plaintiff got $25 worth
of cotton, since which time it has not been
rented for farming purposes. There was
testimony tending to show that since 1925
the land had been covered by silt and sand,
a good coat of Bermuda grass had grown
thereon, and in the opinion of witnesses
the land was more valuable for grazing
purposes than it would be for general
farming use.
Appeal fromDistrict Court, Wise County ;
J. E. Carter, Judge.
Action by C. L. Martin against the Chi-
cago, Rock Island & Gulf Railway Company.
Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Lassiter & Harrison, of Fort Worth, and C.
T. Gettys, of Decatur, for appellant,
H. F. Weldon, of Henderson, and H. E. Lob-
dell, of Decatur, for appellee.For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
Upcoming Parts
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This clipping can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this part or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current part of this Clipping.
Buck, J. [Clipping: Chicago, Rock Island, and Gulf Railway Company v. Martin. No. 12422], clipping, 1931~; St. Paul, Minnesota. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1154863/m1/1/: accessed June 12, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Hardin-Simmons University Library.