ALOSI v. Hewitt
229 Ariz. 449
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- The accident occurred on November 29, 2007, when Fuller, driving a car owned by Hewitt’s General Property Mortgage, collided with Alosi’s motorcycle.
- Fuller was running errands for Hewitt’s companies, delivering a letter to Jay Fischer of General Property Lending and taking a boy to Montessori school.
- Fuller and Hewitt were in a romantic relationship; Fuller lived at Hewitt’s homes in Carefree, Arizona and Denver, Colorado, and considered Hewitt’s Colorado house a residence.
- Alosi sued Fuller and the related General Property entities, seeking to add Hewitt as a defendant under the family‑purpose doctrine and under an agency/respondeat superior theory.
- The trial court denied leave to amend under the family‑purpose doctrine but allowed an agency claim; Hewitt later moved for summary judgment on agency, which the court granted; Alosi appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly denied amendment under the family‑purpose doctrine | Alosi contends Hewitt is the family head; relationship suffices for liability | Hewitt argues the relationship is not a family head scenario under Arizona doctrine | No abuse of discretion; family‑purpose doctrine does not apply to these facts |
| Whether Hewitt was vicariously liable under agency/respondeat superior | Fuller acted within the business of Hewitt’s companies | Hewitt did not direct Fuller's driving; no employer–employee relationship or scope | Summary judgment for Hewitt on agency/respondeat superior |
Key Cases Cited
- Benton v. Regeser, 20 Ariz. 273 (Ariz. 1919) (establishes early family purpose‑type liability when a parent furnishes a car to family members)
- Mortensen v. Knight, 81 Ariz. 325 (Ariz. 1956) (foundational community property rationale for family purpose doctrine)
- Young v. Beck, 227 Ariz. 1 (Ariz. 2011) (reaffirms vitality and purpose of the doctrine; responsibility to provide reparation to closest financially responsible party)
- Pesqueira v. Talbot, 7 Ariz.App. 476 (Ariz.App. 1968) (broad discussion of household definition and application of the doctrine to non-traditional family relationships)
- Jacobson v. Superior Court, 154 Ariz. 430 (Ariz.App. 1987) (doctrine can apply where driver is spouse or head with permission; emphasizes agency concepts)
- Selby v. Savard, 134 Ariz. 222 (Ariz. 1982) (confirms community liability for intentional torts by either spouse if abuse benefits the community)