This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Mrs. Love (D) left her car at a filling station, Humble Oil & Refining (D1), and thereafter before any employee at that station could touch the car, it rolled by gravity off the premises into and obliquely across the abutting street striking Mr. Martin (P) and his children from behind as they were walking into the yard of their home, a short distance downhill from the station. The trial court rendered judgment against D and D1 jointly and severally and gave D judgment over against D1 for whatever amount she might pay P. D1's theory was that the station was operated by an independent contractor. The trial court entered judgment in favor of respondents against D1 and D, and in favor of D as indemnity against D1. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment of the trial court, and remanded this cause to the trial court to be retried upon the issue of contribution between D1 and D. D contends that the judgment of the trial court should be sustained, while D1 contends that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed, and that judgment be rendered in its favor as indemnity against D.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.