Legal Opinion
Tullis v. Blue
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided June 15, 1927No. 3 Div. 763PublishedCited by 66 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSomerville, J.
To , entitle the plaintiff to recover against Tullis in this case, it was necessary for him to show, besides the negligence of Haltiwanger in the operation of Tullis’ car, that Haltiwanger was acting therein as the agent of Tullis at the time of the cóllision with plaintiff’s car.
The fact either of family relationship or of permitted use, or of both combined, did not furnish any basis for liability. Parker v. Wilson, 179 Ala. 361, 60 So. 150, 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 87; Armstrong v. Sellers, 182 Ala. 582, 62 So. 28; Gardiner v. Solomon, 200 Ala. 115, 75 So. 621, L. R. A. 1917F, 380; Beville v.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Parker v. WilsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
- Gardiner v. SolomonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Dowdell v. BeasleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
- Armstrong v. SellersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
- Ford v. HankinsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by66 opinions
- Empire Gas & Fuel Co. v. MueggeTexas Supreme Court · 1940
- Thompson v. HavardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1970
- City of Tuscaloosa v. FairSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
- Pryor v. Brown & Root USA, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1996
- Moore-Handley Hardware Co. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.