Newspapers, Inc. v. Love

4 Citing cases

  1. Marathon Oil Co. v. Salazar

    682 S.W.2d 624 (Tex. App. 1984)   Cited 73 times
    Holding that words that are libelous per se are so obviously hurtful to person aggrieved by them that they require no proof of their injurious character to make them actionable

    However, even assuming that the court's definition is susceptible to that interpretation, and therefore erroneous, and that error was preserved by proper objection, no reversible error is presented, because the definition may be given a construction consistent with the law and the facts, and there is no showing that the jury was misled by the court's language. A trial judge is given considerable discretion in framing legal definitions for submission to the jury, Newspapers, Inc. v. Love, 367 S.W.2d 185, 203 (Tex.Civ.App. — Austin 1963), rev'd on other grounds, 380 S.W.2d 582 (Tex. 1964), and if a charge is susceptible to more than one interpretation, it will be presumed that the court intended the correct interpretation. See Loving County v. Higginbotham, 115 S.W.2d 1110, 1114 (Tex.Civ.App. — Eastland 1938, writ dism'd); 3 R. McDonald, Texas Civil Practice in District and County Courts, sec. 12.37.1 (1983).

  2. Coastal Gas v. Locker

    436 S.W.2d 592 (Tex. Civ. App. 1969)   Cited 22 times
    In Coastal States Gas Producing Co v Locker, 436 S.W.2d 592 (Tex Civ App, 1968), a five-year-old suffered permanent brain damage in an automobile accident.

    City of Austin v. Hoffman, 379 S.W.2d 103 (Tex.Civ.App.), no writ hist. ($82,243.70 with $25,000 for physical pain and mental anguish); City Transp. Co. of Dallas v. Davis, 257 S.W.2d 476 (Tex.Civ.App.), writ ref., n.r.e. ($5,000); Viking Construction Co. v. Beaird, 337 S.W.2d 699 (Tex.Civ.App.), no writ hist. ($171,200 with remittitur of $31,200); Houston Belt Terminal Ry. Co. v. Burmester, 309 S.W.2d 271 (Tex.Civ.App.), writ ref., n.r.e. ($160,000 with remittitur of $40,000); Texas N.O.R. Co. v. Foster, 266 S.W.2d 206 (Tex.Civ.App.), writ ref., n.r.e. ($30,000); Newspapers, Inc. v. Love, 367 S.W.2d 185 (Tex.Civ.App.), reversed on other grounds, 380 S.W.2d 582 ($56,500); McDonald v. M.K.T. R.R. Co., 401 S.W.2d 465 (Mo. 1966), ($48,541 with trial court remittitur of $10,000); Cronenberg v. United States, 123 F. Supp. 693 (D.C.) ($35,000); and Barnes v. Smith, 305 F.2d 226 (10 Cir.) ($400,000). The last cited case dealt with a twelve-year old boy of normal physical and mental development who was, in the court's words, 'completely destroyed as a human being.' The court described his condition as follows, 'Severe and permanent brain injuries have resulted in loss of memory, loss of intellectual functioning, loss of orientation in space and time, difficulty in chewing, swallowing, talking and breathing, partial paralysis and injury to both legs and arms, loss of control over elimination processes, and many other difficulties. He is, however, aware both of his former normalcy and his present helpless and hopeless condition.

  3. State v. Cave

    430 S.W.2d 692 (Tex. Civ. App. 1968)   Cited 8 times

    The State having failed to object to any of the fourteen arguments when made, and having brought only one of the fourteen to the trial court's attention in motion for new trial, it is now too late to afford the opportunity to erase erroneous impressions, if any there were, that the jury received from the arguments. Unless an argument is patently improper, and is of such harmful nature that an instruction could not relieve its prejudicial effect upon the jury, reversal of the cause should not result. Newspapers, Inc. v. Love, 367 S.W.2d 185 (Tex.Civ.App., Austin, rev. on other grounds Tex., 380 S.W.2d 582, 592, col. 2). All points of error presented by the State on Appeal are overruled.

  4. Newspapers, Inc. v. Love

    397 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Civ. App. 1966)   Cited 3 times
    Noting that when an appellate court reverses the judgment of the trial court and remands the cause for further proceedings and in its opinion it states the rules and principles of law which are to be applied to the questions likely to arise upon retrial, these statements are not to be regarded as dicta even if not necessary to the disposition of the appeal

    This is the second appeal of this case. The opinions of this Court and the Supreme Court are found in 367 S.W.2d 185 and 380 S.W.2d 582, respectively. The parties here are the same as before.