NC · jury_instructions
N.C.P.I.—Motor Vehicle 103.65
AGENCY-RIDERS IN PRINCIPAL'S VEHICLE.
The defendant (name defendant) contends that (name agent) [had
no authority] [had been expressly instructed not] to invite or permit
others to ride in the defendant's vehicle and that, therefore, even if
(name agent) was negligent, which he denies, the defendant (name
defendant) is not liable to the plaintiff.
Ordinarily an agent driving his principal's vehicle has no implied
authority to invite or permit others to ride in it (and in this case there is
evidence tending to show that the defendant (name defendant) had
expressly instructed (name agent) not to allow others to ride). If the
driver lacked authority, express or implied, to invite or permit others to
ride, ordinarily the principal is not liable to a rider for injuries sustained
by the negligent conduct of the driver.1
On the other hand, the rider may recover from the principal for
injuries sustained by the driver's negligence if: (here use one or more of
the following bracketed statements as the evidence justifies)2
[the driver had (actual or) apparent authority to invite or permit the
rider to ride]
[the driver's deviation from his actual authority was slight]
[the rider's presence in the vehicle was with the knowledge and
consent of the principal (- that is, express consent or consent implied
from the circumstances)]
[the principal, after learning of the rider's presence in the vehicle,
ratified- that is, approved- the action of the driver in inviting or
permitting the rider to ride]
[the invitation and transportation had some reasonable relation to
furtherance of the principal's business-which relation may be implied from
the nature of the business].
The burden is not on the defendant to prove that the plaintiff was
an unauthorized rider. Rather, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove, by
the greater weight of the evidence, that at the time of the plaintiff's
injury, (name driver) was the agent of the defendant (name defendant),
was engaged on the business of the defendant (name defendant), and
was acting within the course and scope of the agency relationship in
inviting or permitting the plaintiff to ride.
History
N.C.P.I.—Motor Vehicle 103.65 (October 1985). Prepared by the North Carolina Conference of Superior Court Judges' Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions, assisted by the UNC School of Government; published by the School of Government.
Provenance
- Source
- sog.unc.edu
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-25
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
db1e251f7c31f66fab37f62f31613e577144591e0d5087b9a13b3c0ae7991110
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.