Scheel v. Shaw

Citations

• 60 Pa. Super. 73
• 1915 Pa. Super. LEXIS 150

Syllabus

<p>■ Négligence — Master and servant — Automobiles—Chauffeur—Scope of employment — Province of court and jury.</p> <p>In an action against the owner of an automobile to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from the negligent act of the defendant’s chauffeur, it appeared that on the day of the accident the defendant and the chauffeur were out for a ride, and on their return to the defendant’s home, when the ear was about to be taken back to the garage, the chauffeur, not regularly employed as such, requested the defendant to lend him the car to go for his family some four miles away. Permission was granted, and on the return trip with his family he struck and injured the plaintiff. He did not notice at the time that anything had occurred as it was very dark, but when he was about to put the car in the garage, which was on his premises, he noticed the condition of one of.the headlights from which he judged he hád had a collision. He spoke to the defendant about it, and together they returned over the route and finally came to a house where the plaintiff had been taken after she had been struck. The defendant had the plaintiff moved to a hospital and paid her expenses until her recovery. Plaintiff’s witnesses testified to declarations made by the defendant in the chauffeur’s presence immediately after the accident to the effect that the chauffeur was his employee, that the defendant was the owner of the car, but was not in it at the time of the accident. The defendant did not at the time these statements were made disclaim liability upon the ground that the chauffeur was not acting for him at the time of the accident. Held, that the trial court committed no error in giving binding instructions for defendant.</p>