O'Dea v. Amodeo
Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors
170 A. 486 (1934)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
John O’Dea (plaintiff) was in a car accident with Joseph Amodeo (Joseph) (defendant). O’Dea sued Joseph and Joseph’s father, Charles Amodeo (Charles) (defendant), claiming that the car Joseph was driving was a family car owned by Charles. Other than the fact of Joseph driving the car, O’Dea presented no evidence to support this claim. Charles and Joseph testified that Charles did not own the car for family use and that Joseph did not have permission to drive the car. A Connecticut statute established a presumption that if a car owner’s immediate family member was driving the car, the car was presumed to be a family car maintained for use by all family members. The statute stated that the defendant in a civil suit had the burden of rebutting the presumption. The jury returned a verdict in favor of O’Dea against Joseph and Charles. The trial court set aside the verdict as to Charles on the ground that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the car was a family car owned by Charles. The court stated that because O’Dea produced no evidence, O’Dea would not be entitled to recover even if the jury did not find Charles and Joseph’s testimony credible. O’Dea appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Maltbie, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
