Braun v. Averdick
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
Since the evidence tended to show that the driver, Sehroer, “the man in charge of the truck that was overturned, was a chauffeur regularly employed by Braun & Kipp to operate this truck,” the Court of Appeals was of the opin ion that this fact raised the presumption that the chauffeur was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident, and that therefore, a prima facie case was made which required submission to the jury. Had the proof simply shown that Schroer was the regular driver of the truck, employed by the owners for that purpose, and that at the time of this…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Janik v. Ford Motor Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1914
- Doran v. ThomsenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1907
- Pease v. MontgomerySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1913
3Cited by15 opinions
- Gulla v. StrausOhio Supreme Court · 1950
- Halkias v. Wilkoff Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1943
- Babbitt v. SayOhio Supreme Court · 1929
- Collier v. HarveyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
- City of Tulsa v. RandallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.