Hanley v. American Ry. Express Co.
| Decision Date | 02 March 1923 |
| Citation | 138 N.E. 323,244 Mass. 248 |
| Parties | HANLEY et al. v. AMERICAN RY. EXPRESS CO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Report from Superior Court, Suffolk County; Stanley E. Qua, Judge.
Action of tort, originally brought by Martin J. Hanley against the American Railway Express Company to recover for damage to an automobile, in which all other members of Local No. 60 of the International Brotherhood of Steam Shovel and Dredge Men were afterwards made plaintiffs. Reported from the superior court after a directed verdict for defendant. Judgment ordered for defendant on the verdict.
The automobile was registered in the name of the International Brotherhood, but the evidence showed that it was owned in common by the ‘members of the Brotherhood,’ evidently meaning the members of Local No. 60. The verdict was directed on the ground that the car was not properly registered. Plaintiffwaspermitted to amend by making the other members parties plaintiff, and it was agreed that the persons whose names appeared on the writ as amended composed the entire membership on the day of the accident. The case was reported on the stipulation that if the ruling was erroneous, or if the amended writ and declaration, with the agreement referred to and the evidence introduced, would present a case for the jury, judgment was to be entered for plaintiffs, and otherwise for defendant.
The registration, in the name of an international brotherhood, of an automobile owned in common by the members of an unincorporated local branch, was not a registration in the name of the ‘owner,’ within G. L. c. 90, s 2.
[Ed. Note.-For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and Second Series, Owner.]
A voluntary association of several hundred members was not a legal entity and had no separate existence, so as to permit registration in its name of an automobile owned in common by the members.
The secretary, treasurer, and business agent of an unincorporated voluntary association, for whose use an automobile owned in common by the members of the association was bought, was not the owner, and could not recover for damages to the automobile.
When an automobile owned in common by the members of an unincorporated branch of a brotherhood was not registered in the names of the members, but in the name of the brotherhood, an amendment, whereby all members were made plaintiffs in an action for damages to the automobile, did not avoid the objection to a recovery.
Even if registration of an automobile in the name of a brotherhood should be considered as embracing the then members of an unincorporated local branch, who were the owners of the automobile, there could be no recovery for damages sustained by the automobile in an accident occurring after there had been 30 or 40 changes in membership, in view of G. L. c. 90, s 2, providing that registration expires on any transfer of ownership.
Wendell P. Murray and Michael Ruane, both of Boston, for plaintiffs.
Austin M. Pinkham, of Boston, for defendant.
This action was brought to recover for damage to an automobile, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of one of the defendant's drivers. A verdict was ordered for the defendant on the ground that the automobile was not properly registered, and hence was an autlaw upon the highways of Massachusetts. Gondek v. Cudahy Packing Co., 233 Mass. 105, 110, 123 N. E. 398 and cases cited.
The statute G. L. c. 90, § 2, provides that application for the registration of motor vehicles may be made ‘by the owner thereof,’ and that the application and the certificate of registration issued thereon shall contain, with other particulars, a statement of ‘the name, place of residence and address of the applicant.’ This automobile was registered for the year 1920 in the name of ‘the International Brotherhood of Steam Shovel and Dredge Men,’ as owner. Martin J. Hanley, the original plaintiff, was operating the machine at the time of the accident, and was the secretary, treasurer and business agent of ‘Local No. 60,’an unincorporated voluntary association. The automobile was bought for his use, and ‘was owned by the members of the Brotherhood in common.’
[1][2][3] If ‘the International Brotherhood of Steam Shovel and Dredge Men’ in whose name the car was registered was a national or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Capano v. Melchionno
...The statute required that a motor vehicle be registered in the name of the owner. G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 90, § 2. Hanley v. American Railway Express Co., 244 Mass. 248, 138 N.E. 323. If the defendant was the owner or a part owner, registration in the name of his sister did not protect him in the......
-
Donahue v. Kenney
...192 Mass. 572, 589, 78 N.E. 753, 6 L.R.A., N.S., 1067; Maguire v. Reough, 238 Mass. 98, 130 N.E. 270. See Hanley v. American Railway Express Co., 244 Mass. 248, 138 N.E. 323; Members of Bakery & Confectionery Workers International Union v. Hall Baking Co., 320 Mass. 286, 291, 69 N.E.2d 111,......
-
Bouchard v. First People's Trust
...Walsh, 192 Mass. 572, 589, 590, 78 N. E. 753,7 Ann. Cas. 638,116 Am. St. Rep. 272, 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1067;Hanley v. American Railway Express Co., 244 Mass. 248, 250, 138 N. E. 323;Donovan v. Danielson, 244 Mass. 432, 437, 138 N. E. 811. In accordance with the terms of the report the plaint......
-
Harker v. McKissock
...v. Bowers, 70 F.2d 715 (C.C.A.2, 1934); Hall v. Essner, 208 Ind. 99, 193 N.E. 86 (Sup.Ct.1934); Hanley v. American Railway Express Co., 244 Mass. 248, 138 N.E. 323 (Sup.Jud.Ct.1923). A corporation derives its existence from a state franchise; an association, from the consensual agreement of......