Legal Opinion

Parrish v. Walsh

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 6, 1982No. 81-93PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClifford F. Brown, J.

This case requires this court to review the doctrine of imputed negligence as announced in Ross v. Burgan, supra. Ross involved an action for damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff when the automobile she owned, driven by her husband, was rammed from behind by defendant’s automobile. This court, in announcing its decision, adopted a rule it considered “fair and reasonable,” holding that, where an owner is the passenger-occupant of his own automobile, a rebuttable presumption or inference arises that he has the control and direction of it, and that the driver is acting as his…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Summers v. SummersIllinois Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Bloom v. Leech, Admr.Ohio Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Hale v. AdamsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
  4. DeGrove v. SanbornMichigan Court of Appeals · 1976
  5. Reeves v. HarmonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1970

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Shinaver v. SzymanskiOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Adams v. Security Ins. Co. of HartfordSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1989
  3. Watson v. Regional Transportation DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  4. Prem v. CoxOhio Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Sewell v. WoffordAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985

2 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