Case Name: BATY et al. v. McGINTY
Court: Texas Courts of Civil Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1913-01-30
Citations: 153 S.W. 914
Docket Number: 
Parties: BATY et al. v. McGINTY.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 153
Pages: 914–914

Head Matter:
BATY et al. v. McGINTY.
(Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.
Jan. 30, 1913.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 26, 1913.)
Trial (§ 178 )—Peremptory Instruction— Assignment op Reasons.
The giving of a peremptory instruction, without assigning reasons therefor, is not reversible error.
[Ed. Note.—Eor other cases, see Trial, Cent. Dig. §§ 401-403; Dec. Dig. § 178. ]
Error from District Court, Grimes County; S. W. Dean, Judge.
Action by Mary Baty and others against, B. H. McGinty. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error.
Affirmed.
Haynes Shannon, of Navasota, for plaintiffs in error. T. P. Buffington, of Anderson, for defendant in error.
For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am.'Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
HIGGINS, J.
Action by Mary Baty, wife, ^ * ^ and W. P. M. Baty and Sophronia Baty, fa- * ther and mother, against McGinty for damages arising out of the alleged negligent killing of Herbert Baty. Upon trial a peremptory instruction in favor of the defendant was given, the court assigning no reasons for giving the same, and under the first assignment the proposition is advanced that the giving of such charge, without assigning the reasons therefor, is reversible error. This position is not well taken.
Prior to the transfer of the cause to this court, and while the .same was pending in the Court of Civil Appeals, at Galveston, the statement of facts was stricken out. The remaining assignments present questions which cannot be reviewed, in the absence of such statement.
No error appearing, the judgment is therefore affirmed.