The fact that title to an automobile is registered in the name of a wife is not conclusive that she is the actual owner, and clothed with the rights, benefits and liabilities flowing therefrom.ĩ. It is not unusual for a husband to buy a car for the use of his wife, title to which is sometimes registered in the husband's name and sometimes in the wife's name, and when a husband is driving an automobile so acquired and registered, the presumption is that he is in absolute control.Ĩ.
That lingon trial#
Under the facts and circumstances, the negligence of her husband was not imputable to plaintiff, and the trial court erred in so holding.ħ. Although the automobile was registered in plaintiff's name, it did not give her the right, as a matter of law, to exercise control over the operation of it when her husband was driving, and there was no evidence tending to show that she had, or attempted to exercise, any such control. It thereupon set aside a verdict for plaintiff and entered final judgment for defendant. Plaintiff's husband was driving the automobile in which she was riding and the trial court held the husband was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law and that such negligence was imputable to plaintiff. Plaintiff brought an action to recover for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident with defendant. When the question of whether two or more parties were engaged in a joint enterprise becomes pertinent, such question must be determined as any other factual issue that is, if the evidence is in conflict, or if reasonable men may differ as to the proper inferences to be drawn from the uncontradicted testimony, a jury question is presented otherwise, it is a question of law to be determined by the court.Ħ. Any one of several persons engaged in an enterprise is barred from recovery against a negligent defendant by the contributory negligence of any other of them if the enterprise is so far joint that each member of the group is responsible to third persons injured by the negligence of a fellow member.ĥ. Each person engaged in a joint enterprise is liable for the negligence of his joint venturers, if the negligent act is committed within the scope of such joint venture.Ĥ.
That lingon driver#
In order for defendant to invoke the doctrine of imputed negligence in a case in which one spouse owns the automobile and is present while it is being driven by the other, it is encumbent upon him to prove the actual relationship of the parties, that is, that the driver was the agent of the other spouse on the particular occasion.ģ. The fact that the parties are husband and wife does not change this rule.Ģ.
Such presence may be an element tending to prove agency, or that the operation was under the owner's control, so that the negligence of the driver would be imputable to him. The owner's presence in an automobile driven by another is not alone sufficient to make him responsible for the operator's negligence. Present, Hudgins, C.J., and Eggleston, Spratley, Buchanan, Miller andġ. Ballard Baker, for the defendant in error. Timberlake, Jr., for the plaintiff in error.Ĭurry Carter, John J.