From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peronto v. Cootware

Supreme Court of Michigan
Nov 10, 1937
275 N.W. 724 (Mich. 1937)

Summary

In Peronto v. Cootware, 281 Mich. 664, 275 N.W. 724, 725, a mother made a trip with one son because a second son had requested her to come and help care for his sick wife.

Summary of this case from Badger v. Groszbach

Opinion

Docket No. 45, Calendar No. 39,675.

Submitted October 6, 1937.

Decided November 10, 1937.

Appeal from Dickinson; Bell (Frank A.), J. Submitted October 6, 1937. (Docket No. 45, Calendar No. 39,675.) Decided November 10, 1937.

Case by Elizabeth Peronto against Leslie Cootware for personal injuries received while a passenger in defendant's car. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Suggestion of death of defendant and substitution of Ellen Cootware, administratrix of the estate of Leslie Cootware, deceased, as party defendant. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Ray Derham, for plaintiff.

L.J. Carey, Geo. J. Cooper and Glenn W. Jackson, for defendant.


Plaintiff, a resident of Hardwood, Michigan, is mother of Clarence Cootware and of Leslie Cootware, original defendant herein who died after the trial. Clarence and Leslie lived in Iron Mountain, 42 miles from Hardwood. Clarence did not have a car, Leslie owned one.

On December 15, 1935, Clarence's wife was sick. Clarence asked Leslie to go to Hardwood, get their mother and bring her back to take care of his wife, authorizing Leslie to tell the mother that Clarence would pay her what it was worth. Leslie drove to Hardwood and told plaintiff what Clarence wanted and agreed to do. Plaintiff acquiesced in the request, and the next day, on the return trip, the car struck an icy spot in the road, ran over an embankment and plaintiff was injured. She sued Leslie.

The court held plaintiff not a guest passenger, submitted the case to the jury upon the issue of ordinary negligence, and plaintiff had verdict and judgment of $2,000 damages.

See I Comp. Laws 1929, § 4648. — REPORTER.

No arrangement was made nor suggested that Leslie be paid for making the trip or for transporting plaintiff. His act was wholly gratuitous and as a favor to Clarence. The sole question upon liability is whether plaintiff was a guest passenger.

Plaintiff made the trip, not for her own pleasure or on her own business, but in order to render a requested service for Clarence. Her presence in the ear had no social aspect, nor did Leslie extend the invitation to ride as a matter of hospitality. The transportation was a business proposition. If Clarence had been in the place of Leslie the case would be clear that plaintiff was not a guest. Monison v. McCoy, 266 Mich. 693; Cardinal v. Reinecke, 280 Mich. 15. The fact that Leslie was an uncompensated volunteer can make no difference in his relations to plaintiff. He was the alter ego of Clarence, and the same relationship of transportation arose as though Clarence himself were the driver.

Plaintiff was injured in the chest, back, left arm, her head cut, and was in bed something over three months. She complains of pain and numbness. On motion for new trial the court felt that the verdict was somewhat large for the injuries, but not so large as would justify the court in substituting its judgment for that of the jury. We feel the same way.

Affirmed.

NORTH, WIEST, BUTZEL, BUSHNELL, SHARPE, POTTER, and CHANDLER, JJ., concurred.


Summaries of

Peronto v. Cootware

Supreme Court of Michigan
Nov 10, 1937
275 N.W. 724 (Mich. 1937)

In Peronto v. Cootware, 281 Mich. 664, 275 N.W. 724, 725, a mother made a trip with one son because a second son had requested her to come and help care for his sick wife.

Summary of this case from Badger v. Groszbach

In Peronto v. Cootware, 281 Mich. 664, the court made a similar holding where plaintiff, the mother of defendant, was riding with defendant in his car not for her own pleasure or on her own business but in order to care for defendant's brother's wife who was ill, defendant's brother having requested such service.

Summary of this case from Shpakow v. Brown

In Peronto v. Cootware, 281 Mich. 664, 275 N.W. 724, plaintiff was held not to be a guest while she was riding gratuitously in her son's automobile on the way to the home of another son to care for the latter's sick wife for compensation, upon the ground that the trip was not made for plaintiff's pleasure or business, but for the benefit of the second son, for whom she was to render a requested service.

Summary of this case from Goldberg v. Cook
Case details for

Peronto v. Cootware

Case Details

Full title:PERONTO v. COOTWARE

Court:Supreme Court of Michigan

Date published: Nov 10, 1937

Citations

275 N.W. 724 (Mich. 1937)
275 N.W. 724

Citing Cases

Humphreys v. S. F. Area Council

3. That in order to take a person riding in an automobile out of the guest status it is not necessary that…

Albrecht v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

It is not necessary to prove a legal contractual obligation in order to remove plaintiff from the status of a…