Eastern Texas Traction v. Karner

2 Citing cases

  1. Green v. W. E. Grace Mfg. Co.

    422 S.W.2d 723 (Tex. 1968)   Cited 51 times
    In Green v. W. E. Grace Manufacturing Company, 422 S.W.2d 723 (Tex.Sup. 1968), the Supreme Court recently considered the question of a waiver of a timely demand for jury by failure to object to the withdrawal of the case from the jury docket.

    In this regard the language of the current Rule has not changed since 1879. The second class of early cases were decided on a strict interpretation of Tex.Civ.Stat. Art. 3072 (1879); Eastern Tex. Traction Co. v. Karner, 242 S.W. 252 (Tex.Civ.App. 1922, no writ); Jones v. Hamby, 29 S.W. 75 (Tex.Civ.App. 1895, no writ). In Jones v. Hamby, supra, the court after quoting Art. 3072 (requiring the consent of the adverse party to his withdrawal) said 'As the plaintiff had demanded a jury, paid the jury fee, and the case had been properly placed on the jury docket, the defendants thereby, Under the terms of the foregoing article, became entitled, as a matter of right, to a trial by jury.' The statute itself defined and delineated the right.

  2. Highsmith v. Tyler State Bank Trust

    194 S.W.2d 142 (Tex. Civ. App. 1946)   Cited 10 times

    " (Italics ours.) The provision last quoted is adhered to by the courts of this state with remarkable unanimity, Eastern Texas Traction Company v. Karner, Tex. Civ. App. 242 S.W. 252; Jones v. Hamby, Tex. Civ. App. 29 S.W. 75; Finnell v. Byrne, Tex. Civ. App. 7 S.W.2d 139; Wichita Falls Traction Company v. Cook, 122 Tex. 446, 60 S.W.2d 764. Where one party demands a jury and pays the fee the right thus secured inures to all the parties to the suit. Finnell v. Byrne, supra.