Tort Law

The cases reported on this page are from the Virginia Supreme Court and are summarized by Brien Roche. They deal with the topic of joint venture and the related topic of personal injury. For more information about joint ventures see the pages on Wikipedia, 

Joint Venture-Cases

1981 American Realty Trust v. Chase Manhattan, 222 Va. 392, 281 S.E.2d 825.

Joint venture instruction given in this case.

1981 Ortiz v. Barrett, 222 Va. 118, 278 S.E.2d 833.

Joint venture is established by contract, express or implied, where two or more persons jointly undertake specific business enterprise for profit or losses with each to have voice in control and management. No joint venture in this case between attorneys where one was simply acting as local counsel.

1980 Alban Tractor Co. v. Sheffield, 220 Va. 861, 263 S.E.2d 67.

In joint venture each party is agent of other. Parties must have community of interest in object and purpose of undertaking and equal right of control. This usually involves factual determinations. Here parties were involved in joint effort to pull truck but there was no evidence that parties had equal right of control. No joint venture.

1966 Wells v. Whitaker, 207 Va. 616, 151 S.E.2d 422.

Joint venture is said to exist when two or more persons combine in joint business enterprise for mutual benefit, with express or implied understanding or agreement that they are to share in profits or losses of enterprise, and each is to have voice in its management.

1963 Carter v. Nelms, 204 Va. 338, 131 S.E.2d 401.

Plaintiff advised operator that car had entered passing zone and operator thereafter passed vehicle in front. In doing so, plaintiff did not become joint operator of car. There is no evidence that she gave him any directions or advice as to whether it was safe to pass.

1962 Smith v. Grenadier, 203 Va. 740, 127 S.E.2d 107.

Each member has voice in management of venture. Each is responsible for negligent acts of other within scope of venture. Whether joint venture exists is usually jury question.

1961 Garnett v. Paul, 203 Va. 79, 122 S.E.2d 662.

No evidence that passenger and driver on joint venture.

1959 Miller v. Query, 201 Va. 193, 110 S.E.2d 198.

For there to be joint enterprise in operation of automobile so that negligence of driver is imputable to others there must be: (1) community of interest in purpose of undertaking, and (2) equal right to direct conduct of each in respect to it. No joint enterprise where defendant was simply pushing friend’s car as courtesy.

1956 Virginia Transit Co. v. Simmons, 198 Va. 122, 92 S.E.2d 291.

In joint enterprise in order to impute negligence of one party to other, each must have power of control. No joint enterprise in this case between husband and wife.

1955 Wiley N. Jackson Co. v. City of Norfolk, 197 Va. 62, 87 S.E.2d 781.

Relations of parties to joint venture and nature of their association are so similar and closely akin to those of partners that it is commonly held that their rights, duties, and liabilities are to be tested by rules which are substantially same as those which govern partnerships.

1952 Painter v. Lingon, 193 Va. 840, 71 S.E.2d 355.

Plaintiff’s husband was driving vehicle in which she was passenger. Defendant claimed that husband was guilty of negligence as matter of law and that such contributory negligence imputable to plaintiff. Since plaintiff wife had no right as matter of law to control operation of vehicle and since there was no evidence that she tried to exercise any such control, any negligence of her husband was not imputable to her.

1952 MacGregor v. Bradshaw, 193 Va. 787, 71 S.E.2d 361.

To constitute joint enterprise so that negligence of driver of automobile may be imputed to occupant of car, it is generally held that there must be common purpose and community of interest in object of enterprise and equal right to direct and control.

1946 Highway Express Lines v. Fleming, 185 Va. 666, 40 S.E.2d 294.

Fact that decedent was president of bowling club which sponsored activity (hayride) is not sufficient to establish master-servant relation between decedent and driver of hay wagon or to establish joint venture.