Court Opinion

ID: 9830511
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:15:42.963511+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:19:41.752047
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellant filed its motion for rehearing, contending, among other things, that we erred in holding that the burden of proof on the question of agency rested on the appellant insurance company. We have made a careful examination of the authorities on this question, and it is our opinion that the motion should be granted. It seems to be the settled rule in this state that: “The person who alleges it [agency] has the burden of proving it by a preponderance of the evidence.” Winter v. Morgan & Williams (Tex. Civ. App.) 256 S. W. 342; Tarver, Steele & Co. v. Pendleton Gin Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 25 S.W. (2d) 156; West Lbr. Co. v. Nash (Tex. Civ. App.) 243 S. W. 704.
Therefore, the motion of appellant for rehearing is granted, and the judgment of the trial court is reversed and remanded.