Liability to Principal (Tort)

Question 1

Restatement (Third) Of Agency § 2.04 (2006) Respondeat Superior

Answer 1

An employer is subject to liability for torts committed by employees while acting within the scope of their employment.

Question 2

Restatement (Third) Of Agency § 7.07 (2006) Employee acting within the Scope of Employment

Answer 2

(1) An employer is subject to vicarious liability for a tort committed by its employee acting within the scope of employment.
(2) An employee acts within the scope of employment when performing work assigned by the employer or engaging in a course of conduct subject to the employer’s control. An employee’s act is not within the scope of employment when it occurs within an independent course of conduct not intended by the employee to serve any purpose of the employer.
(3) For purposes of this section,
(a) an employee is an agent whose principal controls or has the right to control the manner and means of the agent’s performance of work, and
(b) the fact that work is performed gratuitously does not relieve a principal of liability.

Question 3

Restatement (Third) Of Agency § 7.08 (2006) Agent Acts with Apparent Authority

Answer 3

A principal is subject to vicarious liability for a tort committed by an agent in dealing or communicating with a third party on or purportedly on behalf of the principal when actions taken by the agent with apparent authority constitute the tort or enable the agent to conceal its commission.

Question 4

Humble Oil v. Martin (Tex. 1949)

Answer 4

Facts: Love parks car, fails to break, hits Martin, station proprietor is Schneider.
Issue: Is Schneider indep. K-or? Is Humble (P) liable for tort? Hold: No, Schneider is an employee. Yes, Humble is liable. Rule: Degree of control – look for sufficient control. Reasoning: Humble set hours, held title to goods. Schneider has terminable lease (at will), doesn’t have to pay rent if no profits, must make periodic reports

Question 5

Hoover v. Sun Oil (Del. 1965)

Answer 5

Facts: Barone station proprietor, fire started by negligence of Barone’s employee injures π, π sues operator & refiner (sun oil). Issue: Is Barone indep. K-or? Is Sun Oil (P) liable for tort? Hold: Yes, Barone indep. K-or. No, Sun Oil not liable.
Rule: Degree of control – look for sufficient control. Reasoning: Barone set hours, sell w.e., took title to goods, lease terminable by either party, had profit/subsidies, no reports.