Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, during the latter part of the Austin term, 1884, and the Tyler term, 1884. Volume 62. Page: 39
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
1884.] IICxs v. I. & G. N. R'y Co. 39
Argument for the appellant.
original answer, in which it demurred generally and specially, pleaded
general denial, and specially that at the time the injuries complained
of by appellant were inflicted the railway was in the hands of
R. S. Hays, as receiver, by order of the circuit court of the United
States for the western district of Texas, and that appellee had no
control thereof, and other matters not necessary to state.
Appellant filed a first supplemental petition, in which he excepted
to that part of the amended answer which set up the receivership
of R. S. Hays, etc., and in addition averred that on 15th day of
April, 1879, B. G. Duval was appointed special master by said circuit
court to sell all the property of every description vested in the
receiver R. S. Hays; that pursuant to an order to that effect he
sold the road, etc., on 31st July, 1879; that the sale was confirmed
by the circuit court on 4th August, 1879; that Duval, on 14th day
,of October, 1879, conveyed the property to John S. Kennedy and
Samual Sloan as trustees; that on 1st November, 1879, those trustees
conveyed the property to the International & Great Northern Railroad
Company; that said railroad company was the owner of the
road and all the property vested in the receiver before his appointment,
and was during the receivership the owner of the property;
that the appellee had during all that time been composed of the
same persons, and had been the same corporation and organization,
and was liable for all the debts, claims, etc., which accrued against
it before, during and since the existence of the receivership, and
that the receiver was discharged by the United States circuit court
on 31st December, 1879, and immediately turned over the railroad
and all the other property to appellee, etc.
Other matters were pleaded not necessary to notice, nor in view
of the opinion is it necessary to state the lengthy charge of the
court. Verdict for the defendant.
WTn. Stedmann and Jones & Wynne, for appellant, on the proposition
that the receiver was a trustee for appellee as well as receiver,
and that the railroad company, and not the receiver, was liable for
torts committed during his receivership, cited Ohio & Mississippi
R'y Co. v. Allen Nickeless (Sup. Ct. of Ind.), and Field on Corporations,
sec. 419, p. 456. They also contended that if the same persons
who owned the railway, before it was placed in the hands of
the receiver, afterwards acquired its ownership by purchase, then the
company was liable for injuries resulting from negligence while
the road was operated under the receiver. (This idea was embodied
in the special charge refused, referred to in the opinion.) Citing
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of the State of Texas, during the latter part of the Austin term, 1884, and the Tyler term, 1884. Volume 62., book, 1885; Austin, Texas. (texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28512/m1/61/: accessed November 24, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, texashistory.unt.edu; .