Scheel v. Shaw

Citations

• 252 Pa. 451
• 97 A. 685
• 1916 Pa. LEXIS 638

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Master and servant — Liability of master for servant’s tort — Automobile accident — Scope of chauffeur’s employment — Binding instructions for defendant.</p> <p>1. In an action to recover damages for injuries resulting from an automobile accident, it is necessary for plaintiff to prove not only that defendant was the owner of the car and that the driver was his servant, but that such servant was at the time engaged in the master’s business. The test of liability is whether the servant at the time of the plaintiff’s injury was acting within the scope of his authority in furtherance of his master’s business.</p> <p>'</p> <p>2. Where it appears in such case that, at the time of the accident the chauffeur was engaged in the transportation of his own family, with the consent of his employer, and that at no time during the trip was he engaged in his employer’s business, a verdict was properly directed for the defendant.</p> <p>3. In such case the fact of the efforts of the owner of the car to relieve the sufferings of one injured cannot be made the basis of a legal liability unless by reason of some agreement or admission. The declarations of the servant made after the accident are not evidence against the master unless ratified by him.</p>