Kurtz v. Williams

Webb, Judge.

1. To hold the head of a family liable under the family purpose doctrine, he must have provided the automobile for the pleasure, comfort or convenience of some member of his family, and the automobile must be found to have been driven at the time with his permission or acquiescence. Ownership of the automobile will not in and of itself create liability. Finnocchio v. Lunsford, 129 Ga. App. 694 (201 SE2d 1) and cases cited.

2. Assuming, for the purpose of argument, that questions of fact exist in this case as to whether the defendant father owned the automobile driven by his son at…