John Williams v. DART Transit ( 2015 )

In The Court Of Appeals the state of Texas Fifth Court of
Appeals 600 Commerce Street, suite 200 Dallas, Texas
FILED IW
RE: CaseNO.05-14-01303-CV Court of Appeals
FEB 1 7 Z015
Lisa Matz
Clerk, 5th District
John Williams
Appellant/ plaintiff/ prose
V.
Dart Transit
Defendant
Appellant Brief
Into Court comes now appellant and files this brief and shows the following in support therefor:
Introduction
Appellant is suing Defendant for personal injuries that arose from being struck by abiker after
exiting Defendant's Green Line train at Victory Station in Dallas, Dallas County Texas.
Plaintiffs Original petition.
Williams. J.V. Dart Transit pageloffj^,
\\)alv]
In The Court Of Appeals the State Of Texas
Fifth Court of Appeals 600 Commerce Street, suite 200
Dallas, Texas 75202
RE: CaseNO.05-14-01303-CV
Trial Court appealed from County Court at Law No.2 location on the fifth floor
Trial Court Case NO. CC-14-00720-B
Parties Involved:
Appellant / plaintiff/ prose Defendant
John E. Williams Dart Transit System
5108 Brentwood stair road 1401 Pacific Avenue
Fort Worth, Texas 76112 Dallas, Texas 75266-7255
Ph.682-240-4618 or 682-999-1039 Counsel Joycell Hollins
Jewilli ams676@mnail.com fax 214-749-3660 ph. 214-749-3088
jhoUins@dart.org
Williams J .V. Dart Transit page of
Williams J .V. Dart Transit page ^of4^L
Statement of the case:
Case NO. 05-14-01303-CV
RE:
For the record.
This action is taken against Dart Transit for negligence, and premises liability due to the
alleged defect that proximately caused appellant's injuries. Appellant's complaint is that Dart
Transit has failed to warn, orreduce risk for their boarding and exiting passengers byposting
warning signs eliminating, roller blading, skating, skate boarding, horse playing, and bike riding
near, and or around the platform where passengers may board and exit the train; therefore, I was
struck by an adult bike rider racing top speed on apacked platform of people, and Iwas thrown
into aparked train and suffered injuries due to the lack ofwarning signs.
Williams J .V. Dart Transit page loiJX
Summary of the argument:
Texas Courts have consistently required a nexus between the condition, or use of property and
injury. Inplaintiffs plea to the trial court did, in fact establish a nexus between the plaintiffs
injuries and the condition of defendant Dart's property. Defendant motion ofjurisdiction was
ruled favored under Tex.Civ.Prac. & rem. Code section 101.021(2) of a governmental entity and
amajor subdivision ofTexas created by the Texas Transportation code, and should be entitled to
all governmental immunity, and all types offunding. Unless, State waived. Governmental
functions are imposed on a city by law as part ofthe State's sovereignty in interest ofthe general
public (1) involving for providing for health, (2) involving for providing for safety, and welfare
for the general public. Governmental functions involves; policeman, fireman protection, health,
sanitation services, parks, zoos, zoning, and animal control see Tex.Civ.Prac.& Rem. Code
section 101.0215(a). The court must look at the full terms ofthe act to fairly divide the scope of
the waiver.
Williams J.V. Dart Transit page^f 2Q
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Governmental Functions:
Texas. Civ.Prac. & Rem. Code section 101.0215(b) It is important to note that the list of 36
governmental functions is excursive, while the list ofproprietary functions is not this means that,
for the purposes of the act, only these 36 specifically enumerated activities are considered
governmental functions. Conversely, even though the statue list three activities as "proprietary
fiinctions the reality is that, for the purposes ofthe act, any activity that the city engages in that is
not listed as a governmental function is considered proprietary innature. If a proprietary function
is involved, and liability is established there is no limit to the amount ofdamages that may be
awarded. Governmental Functions are those functions that are imposed on a city by law and are
given to the city by the state, as part ofthe state's sovereignty, to be exercised by the city in the
interest ofthe general public.(l) governmental functions involve providing for health, safety, and
welfare ofthe general public. Examples ofgovernmental functions include (1) policemen
women, and fire men women fire protection, health, and sanitation, services, parks, zoos, zoning,
and animal control. TEX.Civ.Prac.& Rem. Code. 101.0215(a)
Williams. J.V. DartTransit page 5of \X
(Date!
Issues Presented
Plaintiff was a passenger on the Dart train (green line) at thetime theincident accident
injury occurred. Plaintiffwas on defendant Dart premises a public transportation bus, and train
station forthe mutual benefit of being transported from oneplace to the next on a "public
transportation operated facility as a paying customer, and passenger at the time ofthe injury.
Defendant owed plaintiff a duty to exercise ordinary care to keep the premises in reasonably safe
condition, such as inspect the premises to discover lost, orleft behind items suspect items, latent,
defects, and generally make public area safe for travelers, or give an adequate warning ofany
type of danger regarding Dart's premises with posted warning signs necessary.
(Article 1196) Where in all suits brought by or against any of the counties or incorporated
cities, towns, or villages shall be by or against it in its corporate name. Defendant's conduct, and
that ofits agents, servants, and all employees acting within the scope oftheir employment,
constituted amajor breach ofthe duty ofordinary care owed by defendant (Dart) knew, or
should have known that this unsafe condition could cause an unreasonable risk ofharm to its
customers/passengers, that aboard, and exit trains specify e.g., defendant (Dart) knew ,or should
have known that this unsafe condition could cause an unreasonable risk ofharm to its customers/
passengers, such as the plaintiff who would exit the train Dart's green line at victory station at
the American airline center without knowledge ofan adult bike rider racing along on the
platform where passengers do about, and exit the train near the train doors, and did in fact strike
the plaintiffwhile he was exiting the train at Darts' Victory station American Airline Center.
Defendant failed to exercise ordinary care to try to reduce, or totally eliminate this risk, or warn
Williams J .V. Dart Transit pageId.
Under section 101.021(2) of the Act, a governmental unit.
Williams. J.V. Dart Transit page^ of ]jL
| Date]
Effective date for appellant purpose
1. Where in the judgment granting defendant plea to the jurisdiction is was signed October
3, 2014.
2. The notice ofappeals was served and filed on October the 10th day of 2014 from the
countyat law NO.2 5th floor trial court case number CC-14-00720-B this cases was
dismissed with prejudice. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Sharp. 874 S.W.2d 736, 737 TEX.
App- Austin 1994, denied.
Williams J. V. DartTransit pagel of 13L
w
Relief Statement
Wherefore, premises considered appellant seeks to move this court in its reasonable state of law
and do ask the form of relief due the plaintiffbe in the full amount allotted in the court of law. I
seek damages of $ 500,000. Which is halfmillion, and the necessary signs be posted for the
safety of all passengers/ customers, local or out of state travelers. Defendant hasbeen in
operation for well over 30 years in transportation as a service inside the city of greater Dallas
Texas also a municipality by definition.
Respectfully submitted,
s?~ /Arjttfc**??-
Williams J.V. Dart Transit page^of /^
Conclusion served by mail
John E. Williams Joycell Hollins
5108 Brentwood Stair road legal department bar# 24004493
Apt 106 Fort Worth Texas761112 1401 Pacific avenue 1st floor
Ph.682-240-4618 ph.214-749-3052 fax 214-749-0281
682-999-1039 E-mail jhollins@dart.org
E-mail jewilliams676@gmail.com
I hereby certify that I caused a copy ofthe foregoing to beserved byvia mail on defendant Dart
transit
Williams J .V. Dart Transit pageiof
INDEX
(1) Appellant brief.
(2) Identity parties
(3) Statement of case
(4) Summary of argument
(5) Index of authorities
(6) Issues presented
(7)
(8) Basis of appellate jurisdiction
(9) Effective date appellate purpose
MQ) Relief statement.
Mi) Served on by mail
M2) Index.
Williams J. V. Dart Transit page^ofll
w