 | Great Britain. Court of Common Pleas, James Manning, Thomas Colpitts Granger, John Scott - 1854 - 1046 Seiten
...implied commands, when driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable : but, if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." That ruling was adopted in Sleath v. Wilson, 9 C. & P. 607, where, a servant, having set his... | |
 | William Paley - 1847 - 732 Seiten
...express commands, when driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable ; but if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." Parke, IV. Joel v. Morieon, 6 Carr. &. Payne, 501. If a servant without his master's knowledge,... | |
 | Charles Manley Smith - 1852 - 638 Seiten
...implied commands, when driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable ; but if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." Again, a master was held (r) liable for damages caused sifaii> r. by the negligent driving... | |
 | Edmund Hatch Bennett, Chauncey Smith - 1853 - 684 Seiten
...implied commands, when driving in his master's business, he would make his master liable ; but if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." That case was recognized in Sleath v. Wilson, 9 Car. & P. 607, and in Lamb v. Palk, Ibid.... | |
 | Connecticut. Supreme Court of Errors - 1894 - 712 Seiten
...commands, the master remains liable for the servant's negligence while extra viam ; but that " if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." If the servant in going extra viam is really engaged in the execution of the master's business... | |
 | Conway Robinson - 1855 - 884 Seiten
...commands, when driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable ; but if he was going ou a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." Joel v. Morison, 6 C. & P. 501, 25 Eng. Com. Law Rep. 511. Where the master directed the servant... | |
 | Charles Manley Smith - 1860 - 622 Seiten
...implied commands, when driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable ; but if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not he liable." Again, и master was held (o) liable for damages caused by stmth v. the negligent driving;... | |
 | William Mills (barrister-at-law.), Henry Holroyd, E. A. C. Schalch, Arthur Wilson, Great Britain. Court of Queen's Bench - 1869 - 804 Seiten
...implied commands, when driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable ; but if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." Again, in Sieath v. Wilson (3), the facts were, that the servant after putting his master... | |
 | India, Fendall Currie - 1872 - 1084 Seiten
...implied commands, when . driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable ; but if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not be liable." Again, " it is quite clear that if a servant, without his master's knowledge, takes his master's... | |
| |
If he was going out of his way, against his master's implied commands, when driving on his master's business, he will make his master liable; but if he was going on a frolic of his own, without being at all on his master's business, the master will not... 
