Markle v. Perot

Citations

• 273 Pa. 4
• 116 A. 542
• 1922 Pa. LEXIS 500

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Automobile—Liability of owner — Father and son— Respondeat superior.</p> <p>1. The liability of the owner of a motor vehicle, for the tortious act of a driver of his car, which causes injuries to a third person, rests either on the relation of master and servant, or of principal and agent, between the owner and the driver.</p> <p>2. A father, the owner of an automobile, cannot be held liable for the negligent act of his adult son while driving the car, where it appears that at the time of the accident the son was not engaged in any business of the father, but, with the father’s permission to use the car, was on an errand of his own.</p> <p>3. In such case, the fact that the son resided with his father, and that the automobile may have been used at times for the pleasure, comfort or convenience of the family, is not sufficient to establish liability.</p> <p>4. Under such a state of facts the relation of master and servant must be established or the doctrine of respondeat superior may not be invoked successfully.</p>