Case Name: W. A. BROWN, Doing Business as Brown Trucking Company, Petitioner, v. Joe F. POFF, Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1965-04-28
Citations: 392 S.W.2d 113
Docket Number: No. A-10693
Parties: W. A. BROWN, Doing Business as Brown Trucking Company, Petitioner, v. Joe F. POFF, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 392
Pages: 113–113

Head Matter:
W. A. BROWN, Doing Business as Brown Trucking Company, Petitioner, v. Joe F. POFF, Respondent.
No. A-10693.
Supreme Court of Texas.
April 28, 1965.
Rehearing Denied July 14, 1965.
H. O. Metcalfe, Marfa, Brown, Day & Crowley, Fort Worth, for petitioner.
Warren Burnett, Odessa, John Howze, Monahans, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The application for writ of error does not disclose a properly presented error which would justify the reversal of the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals. Accordingly we deny the application with the notation, "Refused, no reversible error." This action should not be taken as an approval of the Court of Civil Appeals holding (387 S.W.2d 101) that, when raised by the evidence, the issue of whether or not a plaintiff has sustained an injury is a "defendant's issue" within the meaning of Rule 279, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. There is a marked distinction between the term "defendant's issue" as generally used in connection with Rule 279 and the term "vital defensive issue," as used in Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Van Zandt, 159 Tex. 178, 317 S.W.2d 528.