Case Name: The Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. J. D. Presley
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1941-06-04
Citations: 137 Tex. 232
Docket Number: No. 7603
Parties: The Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. J. D. Presley.
Judges: 
Reporter: Texas Reports
Volume: 137
Pages: 232–241

Head Matter:
The Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. J. D. Presley.
No. 7603.
Decided June 4, 1941.
Rehearing overruled July 9, 1941.
(152 S. W., 2d Series, 1105.)
T. D. Gresham and R. S. Shappard, both of Dallas, and King & Wheeler, of Texarkana, for plaintiff in error.
It was error for the Court of Civil Appeals to hold that the release signed by plaintiff, and given for a valuable consideration prior to the institution of the suit, constituted no defense to recover on an action for damages, and in not holding that said release was binding upon the plaintiff and precluded a recovery by him. It was error to hold that the defendant was not guilty of negligence in not furnishing to plaintiff a reasonable safe place to work and with proper equip ment to protect him for injury. Atlas Metal Works v. City of Dallas, 30 S. W. (2d) 431; Buckner v. Buckner, 51 S. W. (2d) 769; Wood v. Fulton Property Co., 92 S. W. (2d) 549.
Lincoln & Harris, of Texarkana, for defendant in error.
A release can be vitiated by fraud and false representations. Texas & N. 0. Ry. Co. v. Tilly, 6 S. W. (2d) 86; Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. Brown, 69 S. W. 651.

Opinion:
Mr. Judge Slatton
delivered the opinion of the Commission of Appeals, Section B.
This was an action for damages for personal injuries sustained by J. D. Presley, filed in the District Court of Bowie County against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company. A jury trial on special issues resulted in the rendition of judgment in favor of Presley for the sum of $2950.00. The Railway Company appealed. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and rendered judgment in favor of the Railway Company, but upon motion of Presley withdrew its judgment of rendition and affirmed the judgment of the district court, with one justice dissenting. 127 S. W. (2d) 914. Writ of error was granted because of the dissent.
A careful consideration of the case on submission in this Court convinces u® that the Honorable Court of Civil Appeals at Eastland has correctly decided the issues presented by this appeal. The majority opinion written by Mr. Justice Grissom on rehearing will be adopted by this Court.
Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court June 4, 1941.
Rehearing overruled July 9, 1941.
The opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals, as adopted by the Supreme Court, is as follows:
Mr. Justice Grissom.