Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Creekmore v. Horton & Horton, Inc – Case Brief Summary (Texas)

In Creekmore v. Horton & Horton, Inc., 487 S.W.2d 148 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston 14th Dist. 1972, writ ref'd n.r.e.), Tracie Pearman was employed by Horton and Horton, a building material business as a salesman.

Pearman drove a car owned by Horton and Horton, Inc., which was equipped with a two-way radio so that he could be communicated with at any time.

Horton and Horton further paid all of the expenses for the operation of the vehicle.

Finally, Horton and Horton, Inc., paid for the repair of the automobile after Pearman's collision with Creekmore.

The court concluded that the fact that even though Pearman was driving home when he collided with Creekmore, there was a presumption that because Horton and Horton owned the vehicle that Pearman was within the scope and course of his employment.

There was insufficient evidence to rebut this presumption in the trial court's records. Creekmore, 487 S.W.2d at 149-150.