Bennett

Bennett v. Arctic Insulation, Inc.

Good Law
17 Alaska 537·253 F.2d 652
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 26, 1958Nos. 15374, 15464California1,449 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Pope, J.

These two actions, one for personal injuries, and the other for wrongful death, arose out of the same automobile accident. The complaints in both actions contain substantially identical allegations: that defendant Arctic Insulation was the owner of a motor vehicle which had been entrusted to its agent Boyer, the other defendant; that the latter negligently and carelessly left the vehicle unattended, unlocked, and with the keys therein, in an area where several night clubs were located at Fairbanks, Alaska; that the agent Boyer should have known or reasonably have foreseen that the vehicle might be removed without consent or authority; that the vehicle was stolen by a soldier who drove it so negligently that it collided with an automobile in which plaintiff was driving; that in consequence of such collision plaintiff Richard E. Bennett received personal injuries, and his wife, Evelyn E. Bennett, received injuries from which she died.

The court below sustained motions to dismiss both complaints for failure to state a claim, and entered judgment dismissing the actions. Upon this appeal the sole question is whether the plaintiff had set forth a claim upon which he was entitled to go…

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.