The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1920-12-11
LEGAL POINTS FOR
AUTOMOBILE OWNER
Purchaser OF Car From Dealer
Protected Against Uu-
recorded Lien.
ny Our Legal Corre.poaS~st.


In recent Michigan case man
pfaeturer's distributor sought 10 re-
lain Ave cars which had been SOLO
by n local dealer. Tho latter had
acquired the cars from the distributor
under n conditional dealers agree
ment. No money had been paid on
account by the dealer. and title was
reserved by the distributor. The
agreement provided that when he
secured customer for car. The
dealer was u pay certain amount 10
the distributor, and secure bill OF
sale from the latter, before parting
with the machine. He sold the ilNe
cars in violation Of the agreement.
pocketed the proceeds, and disap-
peared. The claim OF the distributor
was that as the dealer had no title TO
the cars. he could not pass title TO
the purchasers. II was attempted TO
draw an analogy between tins case
and the case Of the purchase or
stolen car. in which even an Innocent
purchaser can be compelled 10 sur
render tho property. But the court
refused to apply the analogy, and de-
cided that the distributors agreement
did not affect the title OF the pur-
chasers. I
It should be pointed out, however,
that IL this agreement had been rec
orded, the purchasers would have been
compelled to give up their cars with
out redress. For this reason, unless
n prospective buyer of an automobile
is dealing with firm of respons-
ibility. il is important TO have the
chattel records examined If he would
be assured of protection against out
standing claims.
Two points of aut omobile insurance
are disposed OF in a recent Iowa case.
The suit was against an insurance
company on a fire policy, following
the destruction of the car by fire.
Payment of the insurance was re-
fused. first because the number Of the
car was not correctly given In the
policy, and second because the owner
had misrepresente the place in
which the car was kept when not in
use.
On the first point the court decided
that il the policy contains descrip-
ton that in other respects positively
Identifies the car, the inaccuracy OF
the number is immatcrial.
AS the second point, the policy
stated-on the basis Of information
furnished by the insured-that the
car was usually kept in a private
garage" The fact was that the car
connected with the owners barn. and
was destroyed in fire that consumed
the barn and contents. In deciding
that these facts did not constitute
Misrepresentation. the court gives
this definition of n garage:
THE word garage was recently
appropriated from the French Ian
yuage, there meaning keeping under
cover, or n place for keeping and, as
il ,,v lich ia ~ n
fined by Webster's Dictionary, sub
stantially like that of the Century
Dictionary, as n place where motor
vehicle is housed and cared for To
be such. the place need not be apart
from other buildings, though that
may be the more common and ap-
propriate way. If the place be
.lean-to' attached to another building,
as a barn or corncrib constructed for
the purpose. or. having been erected.
Is set apart for the housing of the
automobile, it is none the less
garage within the meaning of that
word in either language. In French
the word has reference to the place
Of keeping wagons and other vehicles
of transportation, as well as alto
mobiles. but in English II appears to
have been restricted to motor
vehicles
In a recent New York case it ap-
pcared that a chauffeur drove his en-
ployer to the theater, and was IN
structed to return for him after the
performance. In the inter IN the
chauffeur drove to his mothers resi-
dence on a personal call. The tNl-
dence failed to show whether he had
permission to make SUCH use of the
car During the trip a pedestrian
was injured through the chauf, ur
careless driving. The former sued the
owner of the car. Upon TINS state OF
facts the court decided that the own
or was not legally liable. The ques-
ton whether the chauffeur had per-
mission to use the car was held to DC
ilnmaterial. In other words, the
owner would not be responsible IN
damages for the accident even II 10
had consented to the chaufeurs IN
dividual use of the car.
The Supreme Court of Utah decides
that q contractor employed by city
to alter or repair street surface
must post warnings or have guards
at points OF danger within his con-
troll. In this case an accident re-
suited when a machine ran into an
excavation at a street intersection
where repair work was being done.
1t was shown that there was nothing
to warn motorists of the danger at
this point until 1t was too late 10
escape it, The contractor was held
responsible for the resulting injur &c.
In the same case the court decid
that the motorist IL not limited, as
far az the car Is concerned. to the
recovery of the cost OF. repairing the
damage done. II after the repairs
are made, tho market value OF TIL