Court Opinion

ID: 9672030
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:47:33.997519+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:13.766272
License: Public Domain

WALKER, Justice
(concurring).
While I do not disagree with all that is said by Mr. Justice Steakley concerning the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria, it is my opinion that we should consider and deal with the doctrine in the context of a case involving that defense. It is not involved in the present case. Assumption of the risk is not even pleaded as required by Rule 93, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. I concur in the judgment of reversal and remand, because the record does not establish conclusively that the condition of the floor was so open and obvious that petitioner should be charged as a matter of law with knowledge and appreciation of the danger.
GREENHILL, C. J, and POPE, Mc-GEE and DENTON, JJ., join in this concurring opinion.