Legal Opinion

Piquet Et Ux. v. Wazelle

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 3, 1927No. Appeal, 59PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Sadler,

Anton Wazelle, the defendant, purchased an automobile for the convenience and pleasure of himself and family. On October 21, 1924, with his consent, his son, Jules, made use of the car to attend a dance held some miles distant. The boy was nineteen years of age, and a regularly licensed driver, and there is no suggestion that he was incompetent to act as an operator. The trip, which ended in a collision with another machine, was not made in furtherance of the father’s business, but solely for the amusement of the son. Upon returning, the latter carried as a guest…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Birch v. AbercrombieWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Van Blaricom v. . DodgsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
  3. Arkin v. PageIllinois Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Moon v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  5. Scheel v. ShawSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Breslin by Breslin v. RidarelliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. Greeley v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
  3. Hagans v. Constitution State Service Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  4. Martin v. LipschitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  5. Rosen v. DiesingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API