Collie

Collie v. Aust

Good Law
173 Cal. App. 2d 793·173 Cal. App. Supp. 2d 793·1959 Cal. App. LEXIS 1655·342 P.2d 998
Appellate Division, Superior Court of CaliforniaAugust 17, 1959Civ. A. No. 9825California613 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Swain, J.

Five men, including plaintiff Collie and defendants Aust and Doiron, had planned a hunting trip. Doiron was not able to go on the trip, but he loaned plaintiff his jeep and plaintiff left his automobile with Doiron for Doiron’s use. While driving to the camp site, Collie allowed- Aust to drive the- jeep. Aust negligently operated the jeep and Collie was injured. Collie sued both the driver, Aust, and the owner, Doiron, and received judgment against both. Defendants appeal from the judgment.

' The plaintiff claims and the court found that plaintiff was a passenger. The evidence that Doiron loaned his automobile to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff left his automobile- with Doiron for his use proves that plaintiff was the bailee-of the jeep. (Baugh v. Rogers (1944), 24 Cal.2d 200 [ 148 P.2d 633 , 152 A.L.R. 1043 ].) Neither was the plaintiff the guest of Aust. He did not accept a ride from Aust. His situation is similar to that of an owner who has been held not to be the guest of the driver while riding in his own car. (Ahlgren v. Ahlgren (1957), 152 Cal.App.2d 723, 725 [ 313 P.2d 88 ].)

. The plaintiff is not barred from recovering against the driver, Aust, by reasons the fact…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.