The family car doctrine is a common-law rule providing that, ‘when a motor-car is maintained by the paterfamilias for the general use and convenience of his family, he is liable for the negligence of a member of the family having general authority to drive it, while the car is being used as a family car. . . .’ Stickney v. Epstein, 100 Connecticut (provision) 170, 178-79, 123 A. 1 (1923). As we explained in the seminal case of Wolf v. Sulik, 93 Connecticut (provision) 431, 106 A. 443 (1919), the family car doctrine is grounded in the principle that ‘every man who prefers to manage his affairs through others . . . remains bound to so manage them that third persons are not injured by any breach of legal duty on the part of such others while they are engaged upon his business and within the scope of their authority.’ Cogan v. Manhattan Auto Financial, 276 Connecticut (provision) 1,9, 882 A.2d 597 (2005).
Leave a Reply