Key v. Carolina & N. W. Ry. Co.

(concurring), said: “The testimony, though, satisfies me beyond doubt that the management of the car was -the concurrent act of the plaintiff, her husband, and the driver.

“The car inferentially belonged to the Langleys, though the testimony is not specific on that point. The driver was' nephew to the plaintiff, and he was plainly and properly heedful of the direction of the Langleys. The husband sat by the driver. The relationship, of the three was so close that their action was in common; it cannot be separated; it concurred in time and in character; it was identical.”

This case I think is…