The Family Purpose Doctrine imposes liability on the head of a household for the negligent operation of a motor vehicle by another family member. The doctrine is often used to hold a parent liable for an accident caused by a driving age child. However, it can be applied to other family relationships such as grandparent-grandchild, aunt-nephew etc. The doctrine imposes liability provided: 1) the head of the household owns and maintains the vehicle “for the purpose of providing pleasure or comfort for his or her family;” and, 2) if the vehicle was being used in the furtherance of a family purpose with either the express or implied permission of the head of the household at the time of the incident.
In the recent opinion in Starr v. Hill, the Tennessee Supreme Court liberalized the application of the Family Purpose Doctrine to meet the realities of modern domestic life, and more specifically the high divorce rate. The court held that the application of the doctrine is no longer dependent on the at-fault driver and the head of the household sharing the same residence. The court also held that there can be more than one “head of the household” for the purpose of application of the doctrine. Although not expressly stating it, the Starr opinion overrules a number of prior decisions from the Tennessee Court of Appeals, which narrowly limited the application of the doctrine.
Dan Berexa
Nashville, Tennessee
