Fisher v. Pippin
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtTanzer, J.
In this action for damages for personal injuries caused by an automobile accident, plaintiff obtained a judgment against both defendants, who are father and son. The son’s negligence was admitted. The father’s liability was based solely on the family purpose doctrine after an evidentiary hearing on that issue before the trial court. The father appeals, contending that the trial court erred in finding the family purpose doctrine applicable to the facts of this case. We affirm.
The family purpose doctrine is based on the theory that when an automobile is maintained by the owner for the pleasure…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wiebe v. SeelyOregon Supreme Court · 1959
- Kraxberger v. RogersOregon Supreme Court · 1962
- Gossett v. Van EgmondOregon Supreme Court · 1945
- Steele v. HemmersOregon Supreme Court · 1935
- Wisbey v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1973
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Starr v. HillTennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- French v. BarrettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
- Parries v. LabatoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
- Arizpe v. VankirkCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
- Sova v. Vital Auto Brokers, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.