Torts II, Pages 724–725

Malchose v. Kalfell

Supreme Court of North Dakota, 2003

Facts:

Eric Kalfell and plaintiff were involved in a motor vehicle accident. Plaintiff sued both Eric and his parents under the family car doctrine and negligent entrustment.

Procedural History:

Trial court found Eric Kalfell at fault for the negligence and his parents liable under the family car doctrine.

Issue:

Are defendants liable under the family car rule?

Rule:

LexisNexis IconWestLaw LogoGoogle Scholar LogoPage 724, Last Paragraph

The family car doctrine places liability on the owner of a vehicle for negligent operation by a person using the vehicle with the express or implied consent of the owner for purposes of the business or pleasure of the owner's family.

Reasoning:

The parents owned the vehicle at the time of the accident. While it was used as collateral for a loan for Eric, this does not prove a transfer of ownership. Even if it did, he could not maintain it without his parents' financial support.

Holding:

Yes, defendants are laible under the family car doctrine. Affirmed.

Brave Browser – Ad-free browsing