Court Opinion

ID: 9834386
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:33:08.218477+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:14.483465
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
On motion for a rehearing, appellees seek to justify the trial court’s action in refusing to give the requested special issues quoted in our opinion, upon the ground that the assignments of error with reference thereto are too general. Assignment 2 is as follows:
“The court erred in refusing to give to the jury special issue No. 1, requested by the defendant.”
*818Assignment 3 is as follows:
“The court erred in refusing ti> submit to the jury special issue No. 2, requested by the defendant.”
The cases of Carter v. Guaranty State Bank (Tex. Civ. App.) 262 S. W. 108, and Sanburn v. Deal, 3 Tex. Civ. App. 385, 22 S. W. 192, are cited in support of the motion. The holding in the first ease is not in point, and the holding in the second case has been overruled. In the case of Earle v. Thomas, 14 Tex. 583, an assignment that “the court erred in refusing the charge asked by the defendant” was held good. This holding was again specifically approved by the Supreme Court in the case of Clarendon Land Invest. Agency Co. v. McClelland Bros., 86 Tex. 191, 23 S. W. 1103, 22 L. R. A. 105, in which it is held that:
“Where an assignment of error is. sufficiently specific to enable the court to see that a particular ruling is complained of, it should be held good.”
The motion will be overruled.
Overruled.