Court Opinion

ID: 9638845
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 15:56:03.656494+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:10.202100
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
BOYD, Justice
(dissenting).
I ■ was almost persuaded to dissent on original submission. Further consideration' has confirmed my belief that the jury’s ■answer to issue No. 34 conflicts with the answers to Nos. 37, 40, 43, 56 and 59.
In answering issues submitted, the jury failed to find that deceased was negligent in driving around the flares and barricade ■at the Merritt Street intersection, and failed to find that he did not heed the warning signs, flares and barricade at that intersection. It. seems that an answer that he •was negligent in not driving on the old portion of the highway is for all practical purposes tantamount to a finding that he was negligent in driving around the flares and •barricade and -that he failed to heed the warning signs, flares and barricade. In •other words, it appears to me that the jury found in effect that deceased was and was not negligent in not traveling on the old portion of the highway, and that he was ■and was not negligent -in traveling on the new portion.
But if there be no conflict, I cannot escape the conclusion that issue No. 34 amounts to a general submission, the answer to which could not prevail over answers to issues as to specific grounds of negligence. City of Fort Worth v. Lee, Tex.Civ.App., 182 S.W.2d 831, affirmed 143 Tex. 551, 186 S.W.2d 954, 159 A.L.R. 125. I think the motion for rehearing should be granted and the cause remanded.