Legal Opinion · Dissent

Russell ex rel. Estate of Baker v. Seaboard Air Line Railroad

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided October 25, 1965No. 18411Published

1DissentBussey, Justice

Being unable to agree with the conclusion that the driver’s delicts were, as a matter of law, imputable to Mrs. Baker I most respectfully dissent. True, Mrs. Baker was the owner of the automobile. Being present, she had the legal right to control the same. And, the driver was her son. The presence of the owner, with the legal right of control, and the relationship of mother and son, are however, insufficient facts to create the relationship of master and servant. In this connection see Neese v. Toms, 196 S. C. 67, 12 S. E. (2d) 859. In order to impute any recklessness of the son to his…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Neese v. TomsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1941

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API