Boes v. Howell
New Mexico Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Chaves County; McClure, Judge. Action by Bernard Boes against David Howell. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Owner of motor car not liable for injuries resulting from negligent driving of car by son, merely because of ownership, or that son was permitted to drive same, or because driver was his son. Maher v. Benedict, 123 App.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Chaves County; McClure, Judge. Action by Bernard Boes against David Howell. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Owner of motor car not liable for injuries resulting from negligent driving of car by son, merely because of ownership, or that son was permitted to drive same, or because driver was his son. Maher v. Benedict, 123 App. Die. 579, 108 N. Y. S. 228; Parian McFarlane v. "Winters, L. R. A. 1916 D. 618, where both rules are fully discussed and two lines of authorities laid down; White Oak Coal Co. v. Rivoux, 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1091, Ann. Cas. 1914,…
1Dissent
ROBERTS, J,
(dissenting). The majority opinion follows the rule announced in the case of Birch v. Abercrombie, 74 Wash. 486, 133 Pac. 1029, 50 L. R. A. (N. S.) 59; and, if the doctrine announced by the Washington court in that case is correct, concededly the present case.should be affirmed.
While it is stated in the majority opinion that upon the occasion of the accident two sons of appellant were in the machine, one driving and the other a passenger, I do not understand the majority to hold that the son who was driving the machine was the agent of the father because he was carrying another…
2Cases cited73 opinions
- Bourne v. WhitmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Birch v. AbercrombieWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- Van Blaricom v. . DodgsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Linville v. . NissenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Hays v. HoganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.