Court Opinion

ID: 9831770
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:20:50.376666+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:37.826061
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
The appellee has filed an able motion for rehearing. It is insisted that the judgment rendered by the trial court may be sustained upon the theory of a breach of warranty, even though conflicts exist in the verdict of the jury, which destroys the findings of the jury upon the theory of tort. He does not concede a conflict in the verdict. It is our opinion that the rules governing the assessment of damages are the same in actions upon a breach of contract as in tort, except where a tort is committed under such circumstances that the law would allow exemplary damages. Jones v. George, 61 Tex. 345, 48 Am.Rep. 280.
Generally warranties arise in the sale of property and are made in connection with or collateral to the sale. There was no sale of the property here. The refrigerator was placed in the residence of appellee for the purpose of demonstration, with the ultimate view of effecting a sale. Regardless of the true legal status of the transaction, when the verdict is referred to for the cause of the appellee’s damage, the findings of the jury are in irreconcilable conflict. It is insisted that we have no right to consider the conflict .existing in the verdict because not assigned by appellant, Steves Distributing Company. This Court has held to the contrary.' Boultinghouse v. Thompson, Tex.Civ.App., 291 S.W. 573. The court entered judgment on the verdict and not non obstante veredicto. In such a case the judgment should follow the verdict.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.