Court Opinion

ID: 9827516
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 17:37:02.592013+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:32.597517
License: Public Domain

YOUNG, Justice.
The suit in the lower court was by appellant against Hopkins, a garage keeper, for loss of an automobile placed for storage on a fee basis, but not redelivered on demand. Fireman’s Fund Underwriters intervened, claiming an interest in the action, as assignee under a policy insuring the particular car against theft. Upon a trial to the court, judgment was rendered for the garage owner, from which the losing parties have appealed. It appears to be undisputed that said vehicle was stolen shortly after being stored, and the only issue before the .court was, whether Hopkins, as bailee, exercised ordinary care under the circumstances of the car’s disappearance. Munger Automobile Co. v. American Lloyds of Dallas, Tex.Civ.App., 267 S.W. 304; Exporters’ & Traders’ Compress & Warehouse Co. v. Schulze, Tex.Com.App., 265 S.W. 133; Langford v. Nevin, 117 Tex. 130, 298 S.W. 536. Appellee testified by deposition and in person, and, therefrom, the court determined' he was not at fault, which conclusion, we believe, has support in the rec*929ord. In a non-jury trial, every reasonable inference of fact, supported by the statement of facts, will be drawn in favor of the court’s rendition. 3 T.J., Appeal and Error—Civil, Sec. 747, p. 1060; Houston Oil Co. v. Biskamp, Tex.Civ.App., 99 S.W.2d 1007. Such judgment must therefore be affirmed.
Affirmed.