Court Opinion

ID: 9771973
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 17:03:51.27812+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:40.717292
License: Public Domain

STEPHENSON, Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent. I would not reverse this case for the reason assigned in the majority opinion. It was not error for the trial court to refuse to submit issues as to unavoidable accident or emergency . as neither of these defenses was raised by evidence.
The rule as to submission of unavoidable accident is stated in Hicks v. Brown, 136 Tex. 399, 151 S.W.2d 790 (1941), as follows:
“ * * * if the evidence does not raise the issue that something other than the negligence of one of the parties caused the injuries, then it does not raise the issue of unavoidable accident.”
The undisputed evidence shows the child was running from the water toward the roadway, and that there was nothing to obstruct Berner’s view if he had been keeping a proper lookout. (He does not attack the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury finding that he failed to keep a proper lookout.) Even though Berner has a naked pleading of unavoidable accident, there is no evidence in the record supporting such a theory in this case.
The rule as to submission of emergency is likewise well settled. The law is clear that in order for this defense to be available, the emergency must not have been proximately caused by the negligent act or omission of the person whose conduct is being inquired about. Mid-Tex Development Co. v. McJunkin, 369 S.W.2d 788 (Dallas Civ.App., 1963, no writ). As stated above, the emergency in this case was proximately caused by defendant’s failure to keep a proper lookout and therefore the trial court properly refused to submit it.
I agree with the majority opinion that there is no evidence to support the failure by the jury to find that the negligence of the parents was the proximate cause of this injury. I would find as a matter of law that such negligence was the proximate cause and deny recovery by the parents. I would affirm the judgment allowing recovery by the child.