Chantry v. Pettit Motor Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1DissentJustice Cothran
(dissenting) : For convenience I will address my observations to the case first above stated ; they will apply as well to the second.
The elements essential to establish the plaintiff’s cause of action were:
1. That the car which collided with the car in which the plaintiff was riding belonged to the defendant Pettit Motor Company.
2. That the driver of the colliding car was an agent of the defendant company, acting at the time in the course of his employment.
3. That the collision was caused by the wrongful act of such agent.
4. Injury and consequent damages.
The plaintiff recognized the…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- State v. McDanielSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1904
- Redmon v. Metropolitan Street RailwaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- Butler v. Manhattan Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Rogers v. Saginaw-Bay City Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1915
- Bass v. American Products Export & I. Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1923
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.