N.C.P.I.—Motor Vehicle 103.61

NOTE WELL: The recitation of North Carolina law set

forth above is applicable under general agency

principles, but may not necessarily be accurate for

claims implicating the Motor Vehicle Safety and

Financial Responsibility Act, N.C.G.S. § 20-279.1, et

seq. See N.C.P.I.—Motor Vehicle 103.80—Financial

Responsibility—Express or Implied Permission/Use of

Motor Vehicle.

[Express authority is authority definitively and clearly given either

orally or in writing and not left to inference or implication.]

[Implied authority is authority inferred from the circumstances,

conduct, or language of the parties.]

[However, if the [agent] [employee] is confronted with an

emergency which makes it necessary for the [agent] [employee] to get

aid, and for this reason the [agent] [employee] authorizes another driver

to operate the [principal's] [employer's] vehicle, the [principal]

[employer] would be liable for [injuries] [damages] proximately caused by

the other driver's negligence while rendering the aid requested by the

[agent] [employee].]

I charge you that the [defendant] [plaintiff] is not responsible for

the negligent operation of the vehicle by a driver other than the

[[defendant’s] [plaintiff’s]] [[agent] [employee]] unless you find from the

greater weight of the evidence that (1) the [[defendant's] [plaintiff's]]

[[agent] [employee]] had the authority, either express or implied, to

allow the other driver to operate the vehicle, or (2) the [[defendant's]

[plaintiff's]] [[agent] [employee]] was confronted with an emergency

which made it necessary for the [defendant] [plaintiff] to authorize the

other driver to operate the vehicle.