Price v. Bone

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Price v. Bone

305 S.E.2d 451, 166 Ga. App. 714, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2307

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 20, 1983

Docket66245

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 305 S.E.2d 451 (Price v. Bone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Price v. Bone, 305 S.E.2d 451, 166 Ga. App. 714, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2307 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

The plaintiff was injured when the automobile in which he was a passenger collided with a light pole. The complaint, as originally filed, sought recovery for negligence only against the driver, Gregory Bone. In an amendment to the complaint, James Bone, the father of Gregory Bone, was added as a defendant, with his liability being predicated upon the family purpose doctrine. By affidavit, both father and son testified that the son had purchased the vehicle with his own money and that he had exclusive custody and control of it. A copy of the certificate of title showing Gregory Bone as the owner accompanies his affidavit. This appeal is from a grant of summary judgment in favor of the father. Held:

“The rules applicable to the family purpose doctrine are as follows: ‘To come within the application of the doctrine, the defendant must own the automobile, or at least have some recognized property interest in it or supply it, and he must have made it available for family use rather than for use in his business ...’ Prosser, Law of Torts (2d Ed.), p. 370 § 66.” Finnocchio v. Lunsford, 129 Ga. App. 694 (2) (201 SE2d 1) (1973). “Nevertheless, the ‘principal factor “ is authority and control of the vehicle, and this is not necessarily determined by title to the vehicle or payment for the expenses of operation.” [Cit.] “Agency, not ownership, is the test of liability.” [Cits.]’ ”Dillard v. Clements, 144 Ga. App. 512 (241 SE2d 838) (1978).

Plaintiff urges that a fact issue is created by evidence that Gregory Bone told an insurance adjuster that the car was registered in his father’s name. This evidence does not provide a basis for recovery against the father in view of the affidavits and the certificate of title establishing that Gregory Bone was the exclusive owner of the vehicle. See South v. Martin, 147 Ga. App. 198 (248 SE2d 230) (1978).

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur. Daniel C. B. Levy, for appellant. I. J. Parkerson, for appellees.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Banke, Judge.

The plaintiff was injured when the automobile in which he was a passenger collided with a light pole. The complaint, as originally filed, sought recovery for negligence only against the driver, Gregory Bone. In an amendment to the complaint, James Bone, the father of Gregory Bone, was added as a defendant, with his liability being predicated upon the family purpose doctrine. By affidavit, both father and son testified that the son had purchased the vehicle with his own money and that he had exclusive custody and control of it. A copy of the certificate of title showing Gregory Bone as the owner accompanies his affidavit. This appeal is from a grant of summary judgment in favor of the father. Held:

“The rules applicable to the family purpose doctrine are as follows: ‘To come within the application of the doctrine, the defendant must own the automobile, or at least have some recognized property interest in it or supply it, and he must have made it available for family use rather than for use in his business ...’ Prosser, Law of Torts (2d Ed.), p. 370 § 66.” Finnocchio v. Lunsford, 129 Ga. App. 694 (2) (201 SE2d 1) (1973). “Nevertheless, the ‘principal factor “ is authority and control of the vehicle, and this is not necessarily determined by title to the vehicle or payment for the expenses of operation.” [Cit.] “Agency, not ownership, is the test of liability.” [Cits.]’ ”Dillard v. Clements, 144 Ga. App. 512 (241 SE2d 838) (1978).

Plaintiff urges that a fact issue is created by evidence that Gregory Bone told an insurance adjuster that the car was registered in his father’s name. This evidence does not provide a basis for recovery against the father in view of the affidavits and the certificate of title establishing that Gregory Bone was the exclusive owner of the vehicle. See South v. Martin, 147 Ga. App. 198 (248 SE2d 230) (1978).

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Carley, J., concur. Daniel C. B. Levy, for appellant. I. J. Parkerson, for appellees.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 S.E.2d 451, 166 Ga. App. 714, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/price-v-bone-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack