Court Opinion

ID: 9827233
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 17:18:46.062873+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:27.195748
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
We have carefully reviewed appellant’s motion for rehearing, and are of the opinion that all our legal conclusions as stated in the original opinion are well supported by authority.
On authority of Rosenthal Dry Goods Co. v. Hillebrandt, Tex.Com.App., 7 S.W.2d 521, followed by this court in Texas & N. O. R. Co. v. Owens, Tex.Civ.App., 54 S.W.2d 848; United States F. & G. Co. v. Lindsey, Tex.Civ.App., 66 S.W.2d 419, we reviewed appellant’s propositions on the issues of “new and independent cause” and “sole proximate cause,” as against appellees’ counter propositions that these issues were not raised by the evidence; since the court charged on these issues, as we understand the Hillebrandt Case, it is immaterial that they were not raised by the evidence. For that reason, we have not given the testimony as it relates to these issues. But it is proper for *1008us to say, as a conclusion of law on the whole record, that the testimony upon which this case was tried in the lower court, raised neither the issue of “new and independent cause” nor “sole proximate cause,” and that the testimony was so fully developed on the trial of the case as to preclude the probability that these issues could be raised on another trial. The case was submitted to the jury on 13S special issues, and it does not appear reasonable to us that appellant could have suffered any material injury by the refusal of the court to submit two more special issues — making' a total of 137 — on the issue of sole proximate cause, nor that it was injured by the manner in which this issue was submitted.
Appellees ask conclusions of fact on certain propositions not reviewed in our opinion. This motion is refused; the points suggested by appellees in this motion will be available to them in the Supreme Court without conclusions by us, if writ of error should be granted.
The motion for rehearing is overruled.