Employer/Employee Flashcards
An employer may be held directly liable for its employee’s wrongful conduct when
the employer was negligent in selecting the employee.
Direct liability and Vicarious Liability are TWO different things. Can bring the two claims separately. What are independent contractors?
Ind. contractors are not vicarious liability.
Tony is seeking to hold Phone Co. directly liable for its negligence in choosing its independent contractor. This question asks about a principle’s liability for the tortious conduct of its independent contractors. Although often a defendant is not subject to liability for the tortious conduct of its independent contractors, there are some exceptions to that rule.
Hotel Owner contacts Pipe Co. to deliver and install a large pipe to display a sign for its hotel. Hotel Owner thoroughly vets Pipe Co., and Pipe Co.’s representative sends Hotel Owner information showing that Pipe Co. has extensive experience in installing pipes like this and that Pipe Co. is bonded for this purpose. When Pipe Co.’s workers attempt the installation by using their truck, hooks, chains, and additional poles for stabilization, the pipe falls, bouncing on a passing car and injuring Driver. In a lawsuit brought by Driver against Hotel Owner for injuries sustained when the pipe fell on his car, may Hotel Owner be subject to direct or vicarious liability?
Hotel Owner may not be subject to direct liability for the actions of Pipe Co. because Hotel Owner did not owe a duty of care with respect to the manner in which Pipe Co. performed its work and did not retain control over any part of its work.
Correct. It is a correct statement regarding the direct liability of one who hires an independent contractor and does not retain control over any part of the contractor’s work. Restatement (Third) Torts § 56.
Gas Co. supplies natural gas for the county and hires Supply Inc. to install a service line to carry gas to a new neighborhood. Supply Inc.’s employees negligently cause a slight leak in one of the gas pipes. The resulting leak causes an explosion that injures Neighbor. In a lawsuit brought by Neighbor against Gas Co., may Gas Co. be subject to vicarious or direct liability?
Gas Co. may be subject to vicarious liability for the negligence of Supply Inc. because Gas Co. hired Supply Inc. to carry out an activity that posed a highly dangerous risk and Supply Inc.’s negligence was a factual cause of Neighbor’s harm.
Correct. This is a correct statement of the law regarding the vicarious responsibility of one who hires an independent contractor to carry out an activity that poses a highly dangerous risk and whose negligence in doing so causes injury to the plaintiff. Restatement (Third) Torts § 58.
One day Darcy, a high school teacher, takes her students to watch an ice hockey game starring the local semi-professional team. Aware that the students are in attendance at the game that day, the team owner invites Darcy and the kids onto the ice during intermission. As Darcy steps onto the ice, a hockey puck flies through the air, hitting her in the face and knocking out her front teeth. Darcy sues the team in negligence. In a jurisdiction that recognizes the traditional defense of assumption of the risk, what effect will the defense have on Darcy’s claim?
The defense of the assumption of risk acts as a complete bar to recovery and does not merely reduce the P recovery
Darcy’s recovery in negligence will be barred if the defendant can prove that Darcy voluntarily encountered the risk of being hit in the mouth by a hockey puck and was aware that she might have her front teeth knocked out.
