Opinion
Under § 61 of the Motor Vehicle Act of 1921, a passenger riding in an automobile which is not legally registered, is not prohibited — as the owner is — from recovering damages for an injury sustained by him while the car is being operated on the highways of this State; although prior to the Act of 1917, the prohibition applied equally to passenger and owner.
Argued October 25th, 1923
Decided December 13th, 1923.
ACTION to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendants, brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County and tried to the jury before Wolfe, J.; verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and appeal by the defendants. No error.
Carl Foster, for the appellant (defendant E. N. Smith Trucking Company).
William W. Bent, for the appellant (defendant Hegeman Transfer and Lighterage Terminal, Inc.).
Joseph G. Shapiro and Harry Allison Goldstein, for the appellee (plaintiff).
This case was tried with the companion case of Samuel Kaufman against the same defendants. The matters discussed in that case are equally applicable here, with a single exception. The prohibition of recovery for failure to have a motor-vehicle registered is limited to the owner of the vehicle by the provisions of Chapter 400, § 61, of the Public Acts of 1921. Prior to the Act of 1917, the same prohibition applied equally to the operator of the motor-vehicle and the passenger in the motor-vehicle. The present statute does not bar the plaintiff passenger from recovery for the failure of Kaufman, the owner of the motor-vehicle, to have had it registered. Shea v. Corbett, 97 Conn. 141, 147, 115 A. 694.