Firemen'ss&sPolicemen's Civil Service Com'n of City of San Antoino v. Wells

3 Citing cases

  1. City of San Antonio v. Handley

    308 S.W.2d 608 (Tex. Civ. App. 1957)   Cited 26 times

    A growing number of precedents point to these words which the City cannot see. Firemen's and Policemen's Civil Service Commission of City of San Antonio v. Wells, Tex.Civ.App., 300 S.W.2d 676; City of Wichita Falls v. Cox, Tex.Civ.App., 300 S.W.2d 317; City of San Antonio v. Castillo, Tex.Civ.App., 293 S.W.2d 691; Whitley v. City of San Angelo, Tex.Civ.App., 292 S.W.2d 857; City of San Antonio v. Hahn, Tex.Civ.App., 274 S.W.2d 162; City of San Antonio v. Wiley, supra. City again asks that this Court read out of the Act the definition of terms the Legislature gave in the Act itself, because that definition is shocking to City's idea of what a policeman is. It may be no less shocking to this and other Courts, but the City no less than this Court must follow the definition which includes the terms, 'member of the Police Department,' 'offices and positions,' 'officers and employees.'

  2. Firemen's Policemen's Civil Serv. Com'n v. Wells

    306 S.W.2d 895 (Tex. 1957)   Cited 6 times
    Stating that, by refusing to grant writ on Cox, Hahn, and analogous cases defining member of civil service system, court approved holdings

    HICKMAN, Chief Justice. A summary judgment was rendered in the trial court, the provisions of which material here were: (1) That the Firemen's and Policemen's Civil Service Commission of the City of San Antonio immediately correct its records to reflect that respondent, Luther Wells, was entitled to civil service status in the San Antonio Police Department as of April 30, 1952, and at such time was duly appointed and enrolled in that Department; and (2) that the Board of Firemen, Policemen and Fire Alarm Operators Pension Fund Trustees of San Antonio set aside its order denying respondent a pension, and place his name on the Retirement Pension Roll of the San Antonio Police Department as of April 30, 1952. That judgment was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals. 300 S.W.2d 676. All statutory references in this opinion are to Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes.

  3. Travelers Ins. Co. v. Hurst

    358 S.W.2d 883 (Tex. Civ. App. 1962)   Cited 5 times

    It was for the jury to weigh and consider the testimony of the doctors and to give credence to such portions of the same as they determined in the proper exercise of their jury function. It is well settled law in this state that expert testimony is not required to uphold a finding of injury. Coca Cola Bottling Company of Fort Worth v. McAlister, Tex.Civ.App., 256 S.W.2d 654; Dallas Ry. Term. Co. v. Enloe, Tex.Civ.App., 225 S.W.2d 431, wr. ref. n. r. e.; Armour Co. v. Tomlin, Tex.Civ.App., 42 S.W.2d 634, affirmed Tex.Com.App., 60 S.W.2d 204; Verhalen v. Nash et al., Tex.Civ.App., 300 S.W.2d 676, wr. ref., n. r. e. Appellant's own testimony as to his injuries and serious disabilities constitutes evidence of probative force.