Court Opinion

ID: 9534452
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:40:00.478031+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:43.483230
License: Public Domain

GOODWIN, J.,
dissenting.
I dissent, for the reason that the legislature went to considerable pains to overrule Johnson v. Kolovos, 224 Or 266, 355 P2d 1115 (1960). The majority opinion seems to be putting back into the guest-passenger law *104the idea that any bona fide prearrangement for sharing expenses will take the occupant out of the guest category. In view of the language of Oregon Laws 1961, eh 578, I am forced to conclude that an agreement by a hunting or fishing companion to help with the expenses of a trip is a social amenity within the meaning of the statute.