The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1885-10-18
TIE HIGHER COURTS - TYLER
TERM.
SUPREME COURT.

international ~ Great Northern
railroad va. Mary Armand, from An
derson county. Robertson, j.. The
husband of this appellee was engaged
by the railroad company to take
charge OF q station mouse on its road,
and given pass for himself aud family
and instructed to ship his household
goods on the same freight train on
which he rode. AT his destination he
went forward to the car in which his
x ocds were, aud getting out OF the car,
fell, and WAS killed by ah engine pass
ing on the adjacent track. Whether
no was guilty OF negligence in thus
goinG forward and climbing into the
car, IS q mixed question of
law and fact Negligence proxi-
mately contributes to the injury when
such injury would not have occurred
without suca negligent rot. The YER
dict OF the jury Is attacked Rs excess
i've. Although calculation based
upon the probable length OF life and
earnings or the dec sased will give 4
smaller amount than the verdict Of the
jury, the inoreaaed skill and conse-
qnent earnings Of the deceased in the
years Of his life Of which he was de-
prived, may enter into the considera-
lion OF tho jury in making up their
verdict. There ia nothing showing
that the jury were influenced by pas
sion or prejudice, ana the verdict will
not be disturbed. Affirmed.
Missouri Pacific Railway company
W. Il, p. Watts, from Anderson
county. Robertson, j. Appellee in
formed appellants agent at the time
he was employed as a carpenter in the
car repair department OF the company
that he was inexperienced in such
business. Soon after he was put to
work between two cars standing on
the repair track. He was Injured by
the cara being pushed together by sn-
other car, which Was being backed GU
the same track. The foreman went
down the track and notified ali the
workmen except Watts TO look out, as
WAS the regulation of the company.
This case was reversed In % Texas on
the ground that Watts sought to re-
cover on account OF the negligence OF
his fellow servants, In this case
no sesEs to recover on
the company IN falling to warn
known to the company, but not to him,
end which he could not know by the
use OF his ordinary faculties, Held:
That 1t was tho duty of tho company
to inform appellee OF the dangers of
the service he WAS just entering upon,
and Ii his jgnoranc9 OF the danger and
the means of tae company to Ihwart
u caused tho injury, appellant was
liable, although tue negligent act OF a
fellow servant contributed 10 the in
jury. 1t was the duty of the railroad
company to not only provide regula-
lions, such aa existed, but also to no.
THY appellant OF the dangers OF the
service. Affirmed.
Maggie S. Redding OF al. vg. John
nj. Boyd ct al, from Anderson county.
While, c. j. The debts of q husband
contracted during his second mar
rlage cannot be charged against the
estate OF the first wife in the COM
munity OF such first marriage. Aud
this is true, notwithstanding that the
husband at this death is iusolyont
The widow and children o. the second
marriage cannot claim the exemptions
| allowed by law out OF the estate Of THE
| first wife from the community of this
first marriage. Affirmed.
Tommie Pelham ct al. VS.. Melissa
Murray ct al, from Henderson,
county. Stsyton, J.. The district
| courts, under the constitution of 1870
get their jurisdiction directly from the
constitution itself, and not from such
Jurisdiction as vas conferred upon
them by the statute, as was the case
under the constitution OF 1916. Under
the constitution of 1870 the district
courts had express jurisdiction to
transact ell business sppertaining to
the estates OF deceased persons, aud Il
settle, partition and distribute the
asme. The decree OF such court er.
roueously setting eside to the widow
as exempt from the debts Of tho estate
cannot be attacked as void in collat
rlsdiction; the same Is valid until "a,
aside by direct proceeding for tina
purpose. Reversed and rendered: That
plaintiif take nothing by his suit.