Sarver v. Mitchell

Citations

• 35 Pa. Super. 69
• 1907 Pa. Super. LEXIS 208

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Automobiles—Master and servant.</p> <p>The owner of an automobile cannot be held liable for the killing of a child by his chauffeur, where it appears that the accident occurred when the chauffeur was not using the machine in the course of his employment, and on his master’s business, but, on the contrary, in practical opposition to the master’s instructions, and upon a pleasure trip in which the chauffeur’s personal friends or acquaintances were sharing the pleasure with him.</p> <p>In such a case evidence of the ownership of the machine is not sufficient in itself. The plaintiff must go further and show that the machine was being used in the course of the master’s business. If he fails to do this he may be properly nonsuited.</p>