Gorton v. Doty

Supreme Court of Idaho · Corporations

CorporationsAgencyPrincipal and agentAutomobile owner liabilityagencyprincipal-agent relationshipmanifestation of consentcontrol

Facts

The defendant, a high school teacher, volunteered her automobile to transport members of the Soda Springs High School football team to a game in Paris. She told the coach, Russell Garst, that he might use her car if he drove it, and Garst then drove the car with Richard Gorton, a team member, as a passenger. On the return trip, Garst drove the car off the highway on a sharp curve and Richard was seriously injured. The defendant claimed she had merely loaned the car and that Garst was not acting as her agent.

Issue

Whether the coach, while driving the defendant's car under her condition that he be the driver, was acting as her agent so that she could be held liable for his negligent operation of the automobile. The case also raised whether the evidence supported negligence and whether Richard Gorton was contributorily negligent.

Rule

Agency is the relationship resulting from the manifestation of consent by one person to another that the other shall act on the former's behalf and subject to the former's control, together with consent by the other so to act. It is not essential that there be a contract, compensation, or a master-servant relationship. In addition, ownership of an automobile alone establishes a prima facie case against the owner because a presumption arises that the driver is the owner's agent.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Boise, Nora Ellison told Liam Ortiz that he could use her van to take neighborhood volunteers to a river cleanup in Nampa, but only if Liam personally drove it. Liam agreed, drove the van, and negligently struck a bicyclist on the return trip.

If the bicyclist sues Nora on a theory that Liam was her agent, which is the strongest argument that an agency relationship existed?

Explanation. The majority defined agency as resulting from one person's manifestation of consent that another act on her behalf and subject to her control, plus the other's consent so to act. A contract, compensation, or business arrangement is not essential. Conditioning use of the vehicle on the designated person's driving is evidence of control and consent sufficient to support a finding of agency. (Derived from Gorton v. Doty (n.d.).)