Court Opinion

ID: 9831862
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:26:09.149061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:38.696428
License: Public Domain

On Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing.
In the original opinion in this cause the judgment of the trial court in favor of the appellee was modified and affirmed. The appellant has filed an able motion for rehearing, urging that the undisputed evidence is conclusive that Jones, the appellee, did not receive any injury in the course of his employment. It points out that Jones was not injured while being transported from work but that he was injured while helping load a log truck on which he intended to ride home from work. We have again examined the statement of facts. The appellee Jones testified that the woods foreman of his employer had given him *814instructions to ride a log truck out to the woods' to work and back and had told him to help load the truck in the evening and ride on it with the last load. In keeping with the principles announced in Petroleum Casualty Co. v. Green, Tex.Civ.App., 11 S.W.2d 388, and Federal Surety Co. v. Ragle, Tex.Com.App., 40 S.W.2d 63, we believe that the testimony was sufficient to support the finding of the jury that Jones received an injury in the course of his employment. The appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.