Houston v. Holmes
| Decision Date | 13 October 1947 |
| Docket Number | 36548. |
| Citation | 32 So.2d 138,202 Miss. 300 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | HOUSTON v. HOLMES. |
Stone & Stone, of Coffeeville, and Marshall Perry, of Grenada, for appellant.
W M. Mitchell, of Grenada, for appellee.
Section 8091, Code 1942, provides that no person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the public streets or highways without first obtaining an operator's license, save as to those expressly exempted. And Section 8114 provides that every such license shall expire one year from the date of its issuance unless previously revoked. Section 8094 provides that every applicant for a new or original license shall file an application therefor on a prescribed form, and Section 8096 requires that when the applicant is under seventeen years of age the application shall be signed and verified by the father and mother of the applicant if both are living and have custody of him, and provides further that the negligence of a minor under the age of seventeen years when driving a motor vehicle upon a highway, shall be imputed to the person who signed the application of the minor for an operator's license, and that the person so signing shall be jointly or severally liable with such minor for any damages caused by such negligence.
On May 20, 1944, an application was made for an operator's license for Frank Houston, then fifteen years old, the son of appellant. This application was signed by appellant and the license was issued on May 24, 1944. Hence it expired on May 24, 1945. On July 31, 1945, the minor, then still under the age of seventeen years, applied for a renewal of his license but the application was not signed by appellant. On December 11th, the minor, while driving an automobile negligently, inflicted damage upon the property of appellee for which damages appellee brought an action against appellant, the minor's father, and recovered judgment, appellee contending that although appellant had not signed the application on July 31, 1945, for the renewal license which was in force at the time of the accident, his signature on the application for the original license was sufficient under Section 8096 to carry over the liability as an incident to the renewed license. Appellant contends that when the original license for which appellant joined in the application expired on May 24, 1945, his liability under the statute expired with it.
No case in point is cited by either party, nor have we found any on a statute precisely like that now before us. We think, however, that the principle to be applied is manifest and well settled.
The so-called 'family purpose doctrine' has been definitely rejected in this state, Dement v. Summer, 175 Miss. 290, 300, 165 So. 791, so that there is no common-law liability against the father; and if he is liable, it must be solely under the terms of the cited statute.
Statutes in derogation of the common law are, as a general rule, strictly construed, City of Jackson v. Wallace, 189 Miss. 252, 259, 196 So....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boyd v. Crosby Lumber & Mfg. Co.
...Miss. 322; McInnis v. State, 97 Miss. 280, 52 So. 634; Potter v. Fidelity & Deposit Co., 101 Miss. 823, 58 So. 713; and Houston v. Holmes, 202 Miss. 300, 32 So.2d 138, wherein it is stated: 'Statutes in derogation of the common law are, as a general rule, strictly construed, City of Jackson......
-
Quick Shops of Miss., Inc. v. Bruce
...Day v. Hamilton, 237 Miss. 472, 115 So.2d 300 (1959); Boroughs v. Oliver,217 Miss. 280, 64 So.2d 338 (1953); Houston v. Holmes, 202 Miss. 300, 32 So.2d 138 (1947); City of Jackson v. Wallace, 189 Miss. 252, 196 So. 223 This subject has been comprehensively dealt with by the Mississippi Legi......
-
Howard v. Estate of Harper ex rel. Harper
...which is clearly indicated by its express terms.'" Warren v. Glascoe, 880 So.2d 1034, 1037 (Miss.2004) (quoting Houston v. Holmes, 202 Miss. 300, 303, 32 So.2d 138, 139 (1947)). We disagree with the Plaintiffs' contention. Neither of these licensing statutes expressly create a duty by a lic......
-
Burkett v. American Family Ins. Group
...Scott, 7 Cal. App.2d 494, 46 P.2d 764 (1935); McFarland v. Cordiero, 99 Cal.App. 352, 278 P. 889 (1929); see also Houston v. Holmes, 202 Miss. 300, 32 So.2d 138, 139 (1947). In response, the Burketts assert that this case law is inapplicable because these other state statutes impute neglige......