Fulton v. Kaler
| Decision Date | 26 March 1930 |
| Parties | FULTON v. KALER et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Third District Court of Eastern Middlesex; J. M. Maloney, Acting Special Justice.
Action by David H. Fulton against Lloyd Kaler and others. The appellate division of the district court dismissed a report from a finding for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Order dismissing report affirmed.
1. Automobiles k197(1)-Administrator selling truck to buyer, who promised to register transfer, but, without administrator's knowledge, failed to do so, held not liable for damages from operation of truck (G. L. c. 90, ss 2, 9, St. 1924, c. 427).
Where administrator of estate sold truck to buyer, who had registration certificate and number plates in his possession, and buyer promised to send in the registration certificate to the register with written notice of transfer of ownership, as required by G. L. c. 90, s 2, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427, but failed to do so, and without seller's knowledge continued to operate truck under registration in name of estate, administrator did not participate in wrongful use of truck and was not liable under section 9, either in individual or representative capacity for damages resulting from its operation.
2. Automobiles k19-Statute requiring seller of motor vehicle to turn in registration certificate with notice of transfer does not make seller responsible as continuing owner (G. L. c. 90, s 2, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427).
G. L. c. 90, s 2, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427, requiring person in whose name motor vehicle is registered to turn in registration certificate with written notice of transfer of ownership, in event of sale, does not make seller responsible as a continuing owner until new registration is taken out.
3. Automobiles k56, 145-Owner who allows use of unregistered motor vehicle or registered vehicle by unregistered person is liable for damages resulting from operation (G. L. c. 90, s 9, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427).
Owner of motor vehicle, who allows his unregistered machine to be used or who allows his registered vehicle to be used by an unregistered person contributes to a nuisance, and is liable for damages resulting from vehicle's operation under G. L. c. 90, s 9, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427, forbidding owner or custodian of motor vehicle permitted to be operated or remain upon any way unless registered.
4. Automobiles k56-former owner of motor vehicle, ignorant of its status or use, is not chargeable with participation in its presence upon highway (G. L. c. 90, s 9, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427).
There is no participation is presence of trespassing machine upon public way, such as to create liability for damages resulting from operation of vehicle, on part of one who has ceased to be owner or custodian of motor vehicle and who is ignorant of its status or use thereafter, under G. L. c. 90, s 9, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427, forbidding owner or custodian of motor vehicle to permit its operation unregistered.
D. H. Fulton, of Boston, for appellant.
W. B. Sullivan, Jr., of Boston, for appellees.
This is an appeal from an order of an appellate division of district courts dismissing a report from a finding for the defendants.
The plaintiff's automobile was damaged on May 1, 1926, in a collision with a truck owned and driven by the defendant Kaler. This truck with others had been owned by one William H. Stahl of Cambridge who had carried on a trucking business and from time to time had employed Kaler in it. He died November 16, 1925, and John L. Stahl of Camden, Maine, who was duly appointed administrator of his estate, employed Kaler to carry on the business until the trucks were disposed of. Kaler caused them to be registered for 1926 in the name of ‘W. H. Stahl Estate.’ On February 15, 1926, John L. Stahl sold the truck in question to Kaler, who then had the truck, the registration certificate and the number plates in his possession, and who promised to send to the register the registration certificate with written notice of the transfer of ownership and the name, place of residence and address of the new owner as was required by G. L. c. 90, § 2, as then amended by St. 1924, c. 427, to be done by ‘the person in whose name such motor vehicle or trailer is registered’ in the event of a transfer of ownership and the consequent expiration of the registration. Kaler did not perform this promise; and was operating the truck on May 1, 1926, under the ‘estate’ registration and with the original number plates. John L. Stahl was ignorant of Kaler's conduct in these...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Liddell v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co.
-
Liddell v. Middlesex Motor Co.
...upon it are those of the dealer from whom he bought it. McDonald v. Dundon, 242 Mass. 229, 136 N. E. 264, 26 A. L. R. 1243;Fulton v. Kaler (Mass.) 170 N. E. 818. See O'Halleron v. Miller (Mass.) 175 N. E. 94. A motor vehicle registered under G. L. c. 90, § 2, in the name of the owner, when ......
-
Fox v. Pallotta
...v. Hutchinson, 241 Mass. 557, 564, 136 N. E. 261;McDonald v. Dundon, 242 Mass. 229, 232, 233, 136 N. E. 264, 26 A. L. R. 1243;Fulton v. Kaler (Mass.) 170 N. E. 818. There is nothing in the case to indicate that the defendant was negligent in selecting Beraldi to do the work or to show that ......
-
Hobbs v. Cunningham
...himself as legatee; he did nothing to cause its registration to be change, G. L. c. 90, § 2, as amended by St. 1924, c. 427, Fulton v. Kaler (Mass.) 170 N. E. 818; and did not execute a bill of sale nor file the notice of intended sale as required by G. L. c. 140, § 65. So far as appears he......