Opinion

Posey Ex Rel. Posey v. Krogh

  • 65 N.D. 490
  • 259 N.W. 757
  • 1934 N.D. LEXIS 201
Court
North Dakota Supreme Court
Filed
Dec 20, 1934
Status
Published
Author
Moellring
On the bench
Burr, Moellring, Christianson, Burke, Nuessle, Morris
Cited by
20 cases

The opinion

Moellring, J.

(Specially concurring.) I concur in the result. It is my view that under the facts in this case chapter 184, Session Laws of 1931, precludes recovery of damages. I do not concur in the reasoning or the conclusion that the defendant, Blanche A. Krogh, under the evidence in this case, is not governed by the rules of the so-called “family car doctrine,” for if we assume that she is so governed then said chapter 184 is likewise applicable and recovery cannot be had.

In determining this case, therefore, it is not necessary to pass upon the question as to whether .or not defendant’s possession and ownership of the automobile bring her within the rules of the family car doctrine, and I therefore express no opinion thereon.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.