Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

Plaintiff Emmit E. Fisher sued Carrousel Motor Hotel, Inc., the Brass Ring Club, Inc., and R.W. Flynn, alleging that while standing in a serving line holding his dinner plate at the Brass Ring Club (operated by Carrousel) Flynn walked over, seized the plate and "violently tore it" from his hand and shouted that plaintiff, "a negro," could not be served there, causing great mental anguish and humiliation. Flynn was deceased at time of trial; the action proceeded against Carrousel and the Brass Ring. A jury found (among other things) that Flynn forcibly dispossessed plaintiff of his dinner plate, shouted that plaintiff could not be served, that plaintiff was humiliated, that Flynn acted within the scope of his employment, and awarded damages of $400 and $500 on separate findings. At trial plaintiff testified Flynn did not physically touch him and there was no evidence of fear, apprehension, or resulting physical injury. The trial court overruled plaintiff's motion for judgment and granted defendants' motion for judgment non obstante veredicto (JNOV) that plaintiff take nothing. Plaintiff appealed.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether Flynn's conduct, under the facts of this case, constituted an assault under Article 1138, Vernon's Ann. Texas Penal Code.
  2. Whether mental anguish or humiliation, without proof of resulting physical injury, supports recovery of damages.
  3. Whether the trial court erred in denying plaintiff's motion for judgment on the verdict and in granting defendants' motion for JNOV.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Texas Bus Lines v. Anderson, CCA (n.r.e.), 233 S.W.2d 961 Support for the proposition that under the undisputed factual situation no assault was committed. The court relied on it in concluding Flynn's acts did not constitute an assault under the facts presented.
Harned v. E-Z Finance Co., 151 Tex. 641, 254 S.W.2d 81 "Mental anguish and mental suffering without proof of resulting physical injury will not support a recovery of damages." The court applied the principle to hold that absent assault or resulting physical injury plaintiff cannot recover for embarrassment and humiliation.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court first cited Article 1138 defining assault and battery, including that an attempt or threatening gesture accompanied by words indicating immediate intent and ability may be an assault. The court reviewed the record and noted that although the jury found Flynn forcibly dispossessed plaintiff of his plate and that plaintiff was humiliated, plaintiff testified Flynn did not physically touch him and there was no evidence of fear, apprehension, or physical injury. Relying on Texas Bus Lines v. Anderson, the court concluded that under the undisputed factual situation no assault was committed by Flynn. The court then applied Harned v. E‑Z Finance Co., which holds that mental anguish without proof of resulting physical injury will not support recovery, and determined that in the absence of an assault or resulting physical injury plaintiff could not recover for embarrassment and humiliation. Based on those conclusions the court found plaintiff had proven no cause of action.

Holding and Implications

Affirmed.

The trial court's judgment granting defendants' motion JNOV that plaintiff take nothing was affirmed and plaintiff's points were overruled. The direct effect is that plaintiff recovers nothing on his claims against the appellees. The opinion does not announce broader new precedent beyond applying the cited authorities to the facts of this case.

Emmit E. FISHER, Appellant, v. CARROUSEL MOTOR HOTEL, INC., et al., Appellees.

OPINION

McDONALD, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal by plaintiff Fisher from a take-nothing judgment in a suit for damages for an alleged assault on plaintiff by defnedant's employee.

Plaintiff sued Carrousel Motor Hotel, Inc., the Brass Ring Club, Inc., and R. W. Flynn, alleging plaintiff was invited to dinner by third parties at the Brass Ring Club, operated by defendant Carrousel; that plaintiff was standing in the serving line holding his dinner plate when 'plaintiff was assaulted by defendant Flynn, Manager of said Brass Ring Club, who walked over to plaintiff, seized his dinner plate, and violently tore it out of his hand. At the same time, Flynn shouted in a loud and offensive manner that plaintiff, a negro, could not be served there.' Plaintiff alleged as a result of Flynn's conduct, 'plaintiff suffered great mental anguish and humiliation.'

Defendant Carrousel answered by general denial; defendant Flynn was deceased at time of trial; and the trial proceeded against Carrousel and the Brass Ring.

Trial was to a jury which found:

1) Flynn forcibly dispossessed plaintiff of his dinner plate.
2) Plaintiff was humiliated and subjected to indignity by the actions of Flynn in dispossessing plaintiff of his dinner plate.
3) Flynn shouted in a loud and offensive manner that plaintiff could not be served at the Brass Ring Club.
4) Plaintiff was humiliated and subjected to indignity by actions of Flynn in so shouting.
5) Flynn was acting within course and scope of his employment by Carrousel Motor Hotel.
6) $400 will compensate plaintiff for the humiliation and indignity he suffered caused by Flynn's conduct.
7) Flynn acted maliciously with wanton disregard of plaintiff's rights and feelings.
8) Carrousel Motor Hotel did not authorize or approve the conduct of Flynn.
9) $500 will compensate plaintiff for the malicious act and wanton disregard of plaintiff's feelings and rights committed by Flynn.

Plaintiff moved for judgment on the verdict; and defendant moved for judgment that plaintiff take nothing, asserting that as a matter of law the acts complained of by plaintiff, committed by Flynn, do not constitute an assault or other actionable cause.

The trial court overruled plaintiff's motion for judgment; and granted defendant's motion N.O.V. that plaintiff take nothing.

Plaintiff appeals, contending the trial court erred:

1) In denying plaintiff's motion for judgment; and
2) In granting defendant's motion for judgment non obstante.

The record reflects plaintiff came into the Brass Ring with others and picked up a plate at the serving line. Flynn approached plaintiff and took the plate from his hand and told him he could not be served. Plaintiff testified tht Flynn Did not physically touch him. There is no evidence plaintiff ever suffered any fear or apprehension, or that he suffered any resulting physical injury. Plaintiff testified he was highly embarrassed and humiliated.

Article 1138 Vernon's Ann.Texas Penal Code provides:

"The use of any unlawful violence upon the person of another with intent to
injure him, whatever be the means or the degree of violence used, is an assault and battery. Any attempt to commit a battery, or any threatening gesture showing in itself or by words accompanying it, an immediate intention, coupled with an ability to commit a battery, is an assault.'

Under the undisputed factual situation, we think no assault was committed by Flynn on plaintiff. Texas Bus Lines v. Anderson, CCA (n.r.e.), 233 S.W.2d 961.

Mental anguish and mental suffering without proof of resulting physical injury will not support a recovery of damages. Harned v. E-Z Finance Co., 151 Tex. 641, 254 S.W.2d 81.

Absence an assault or resulting physical injury, plaintiff cannot recover for the embarrassment and humiliation suffered as a result of Flynn's conduct.

We think Flynn's conduct did not constitute an assault, and since no resulting physicial injuries were alleged or proved, plaintiff has proven no cause of action.

The judgment of the trial court is correct. Plaintiff's points are overruled. Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

FISHER v. CARROUSEL MOTOR HOTEL INC
(May 11, 1967)