Case Name: MILLERS' INDEMNITY UNDERWRITERS v. SCHRIEBER et al.
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1922-04-17
Citations: 240 S.W. 963
Docket Number: No. 726
Parties: MILLERS’ INDEMNITY UNDERWRITERS v. SCHRIEBER et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 240
Pages: 963–970

Head Matter:
MILLERS’ INDEMNITY UNDERWRITERS v. SCHRIEBER et al.
(No. 726.)
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.
Nov. 14, 1921.
April 17, 1922.
Rehearing Denied May 3, 1922.)
On Motion to Strike Brief.
1. Appeal and error <&wkey;742(l), 767(1) — Distinction between assignments of error and propositions must be observed under new rule.
The new.rules promulgated by the Supreme Court June 22, 1921 (230 S. W. vii), did not abolish the distinction between.a “proposition” and an “assignment of error” as those terms are applied to briefing, so that a brief may be stricken as not complying with the rules, where it does not submit propositions as provided by Rule 30, but only brings forward a number of assignments of error designated as points involved, some of which cannot be submitted as a proposition of law; but the plaintiff in error will be permitted to file a new brief under Rule 40.
On the Merits.
2. Master and servant <&wkey;405 (4) — Evidence in compensation case held to show injury caused death.
Evidence that a servant named in a claim for compensation was apparently in sound health up to the time he admittedly fell from a scaffold and received an injury, 'with expert testimony that injury was the cause of his death, held sufficient to sustain a finding by the jury that his death resulted from the injury, though every physician who attended Mm testified that Ms death was caused by a disease which the experts tor the beneficiaries stated would have incapacitated him before reaching the stage at t which it would have produced the condition in which he was immediately after the injury.
3. Trial i&wkey;359(l) — Conflicting answers of jury to spieciai issues do not prevent judgment unless conflict is as to material issue.
Not all conflict in answers by a jury to special interrogatories prevents judgment upon the verdict, but the conflict, to have that effect, must be with reference to material and controlling issues, and, if the answers as a whole leave without contradiction all material issues necessary to support 'a judgment for one of the parties, such judgment may be rendered.
4. Master and servant <&wkey;4!7(5) — Special findings in compensation case held not necessarily conflicting.
In an action for compensation for the death of an employee, an answer by the jury to a special issue that the death was due to the combined effect of a disease, if any, and of the injuries received, was not necessarily fh conflict with answers to previous issues stating that the employee was not afflicted with that disease and that the injuries were the sole cause of the death.
5. Master and servant &wkey;j376(2) — Compensation allowable for death concurrently caused by injury and disease.
Compensation may be recovered for the death of an employee which was caused concurrently by a disease and by the injuries received in the course of his employment.
6. Master and servant <&wkey;4l7(5> — Conflict between findings held not to prevent judgment for compensation.
Conflict between special findings by the jury that the death of an employee was caused solely by an injury received in the course of his employment, and a finding that such injury and a disease combined to cause the death, does not prevent a judgment for the compensation, since the compensation would be payable in either event.
7. Trial &wkey;>352(5) — Assumption of fact established by uncontradicted evidence is not erroneous.
It was not error to assume, in a special issue submitted to the jury, that the employee received an injury by a fall from the scaffold, where the uncontradicted evidence showed that he was injured to some extent at least by such fall.
8. Trial <&wkey;>l94(!9) — Charge as to amount of compensation held to be on the weight of the evidence.
A charge that the law gave, to the beneficiaries of an employee who died as the result of an injury received in the course of Ms employment, compensation at the rate therein stated, and submitting to the jury the question how much plaintiffs were entitled to recover, would be erroneous in a case submitted for a general verdict, as being up'on the weight of the evidence, which was conflicting on the issue whether the death resulted from the injuries received.
9. Appeal and error &wkey;>l068( I) — -Charge on weight of evidence in case submitted on spie-ciai issues held not prejudicial to defendant.
In an action for compensation for the death of an employee, submitted on special issues, in answering which the jury found that the death resulted from the injury, the giving of a charge on the weight of the evidence, because assuming that the death resulted from the injury, was not prejudicial to defendant.
10. Appeal and error <&wkey;>!03l(l) — Error does not require reversal unless prejudice appears from the record.
Since the promulgation of Rule 62a. (149 S. W. x), proMbiting Courts of Civil Appeals from reversing for error unless they can say from the entire record that it was calculated to ’cause, and probably did cause, • an improper verdict and judgment, the presumption that aby error was presumed to be prejudicial no longer obtains.
11. Master and servant <&wkey;4l8(7) — Award' of compensation in excess of proper sums held not to show prejudice on piart of jury.
Where the amount of compensation awarded by the jury was excessive because they found the weekly wage of an employee .earning $3.50 a day as $21 instead of $20.19, as fixed by the Workmen's Compensation Act, pt. 4, § 1 (Vernon’s Sayles’ Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 5246yyy), and also awarded excessive amounts as accrued prior to the time of trial, the excess does not indicate the jury was actuated by improper motive and does not require reversal of the judgment, which can be reduced to the proper amount.
12. Master and servant <&wkey;386(5) — Widow entitled to half of compensation for death.
Where a deceased employee left a widow and two minor children, the compensation for his death, when prorated according to the law of descent and distribution relating to community property, should go one-half to the widow and one-fourth to each of the children, so that an apportionment of one-third of award to each beneficiary was erroneous.
13. Master and servant <&wkey;4l8(7) — Wrong apportionment of compensation can be corrected without reversal.
The fact that the jury made a wrong apportionment of compensation awarded, under the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Vernon’s Sayles’ Ann. Civ. St. 1914, art. 5246h ét seq.), for the death of an employee, does not require reversal of the judgment, but it can be modified by the Court of Civil Appeals to conform to the law.
Error from District Court, Orange County; J. T. Adams, Judge.
Action by Martha Schrieber and others against the Millers’ Idemnity Underwriters to set aside a decision of the Industrial Accident Board denying compensation for the death of an employee and to recover such compensation. Judgment for the plaintiffs, and the defendant brings error.
Brief of plaintiff in error stricken from the record, with leave to file a new brief, and judgment reformed and affirmed after hearing on the merits.
Collins, Morris & Bames, of Beaumont, for plaintiff in error.
C. W. Howth, of Beaumont, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
On Motion to Strike Brief.
WALKER, J.
Plaintiffs in error have undertaken to brief this case under the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court on the 22d day of June, 1921 (230 S. W. vii).
They have complied with the rules in making a reasonable succinct statement of the nature and result of the suit, but they have not submitted propositions upon which they predicate their appeal, as provided by Rule 30, 230 S. W. vii. All they have done is to bring forward a number of their assignments of error and designate them as being "Points Involved." Some of these purported assignments appear to he verbatim copies of the assignments filed in the trial court; others are culled from such assignments. Plaintiffs in error have not set out at the back of their brief, nor immediately following the statement of the case, "verbatim copies of such of the assignments of error filed in the trial court and reproduced in the transcript as are relied on in the appeal."
It is clear from a reading of the amended rules that the Supreme Court did not intend to abolish the distinction which the bar has all along recognized as existing between a "proposition" and "an assignment of error." This distinction- is too well understood to require any discussion on our part. If an assignment of error can be submitted as a proposition of law under a recognized construction of that term, as applied to briefing, we see nothing in the rules prohibiting an appellant from bringing forward such assignments of error as one of the "propositions or points upon which the appeal is predicated"; but, unless such assignment of error is a proposition of law, it should not he so used. It seems to us, in applying the new. rules, that the old, well-understood definitions and constructions; in so far as applicable, should be recognized and given full force.
Because plaintiff in error's brief is not in compliance with the rules of briefing, we order that it be stricken from the record. In view of Rule 40 (230 S. W. viii), which is as follows:
"In case the brief for either party is in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals defective or insufficient, the court may at its discretion set aside the submission of the cause with such orders for postponement and filing of amended briefs as it may deem proper"
—we further order that plaintiff in error be allowed 30 days from the date hereof in which to file new 'briefs. The submission of this cause on the third instant is withdrawn, subject to be resubmitted after being properly briefed.
©=s>For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER, in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes
(g^pFor-other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes