Vicarious Liability Flashcards
Vicarious Liability Issue:
The issue is whether the employer will be liable for the acts committed by employee under vicarious liability
Tortfeasor’s actions:
Negligent
Intentional Tort
Strict Liability
Other
Relationship:
Employer/Employee
Employer/Independent Contractor
Joint Enterprise
Bailment
If employer/employee
“Scope of Employment”
the issue is whether the employee was acting within the scope of employment
Vicarious Liability Rule:
If at the time of his negligent or reckless act, the servant was acting in the course and scope of his employment, then his employer is vicariously liable to the P for his servant’s torts. No liability for intentional torts
Factors to consider whether the employee was acting within the scope of employment:
- Amount of control over tortfeasor
- Motivation to serve further purpose for employer
- Character of act: how close what it is required for employee to do
- Frolic/Detour
- Going/Coming Rule
- Modern Trend: Foreseeability
SN: Amount of control over tortfeasor
- How much control does the employee have over the details of the work
- Is the actor engaged in distinct occupation or business
- Who supplies the tools and place of work
- How long is the person employed
- Are they paid by the hour or to do a particular job until complete
- How do the parties understand the relationship
SN: Motivation to serve for further purpose of employer
You can do it!!!
SN: Character of act
What was the employee hired to do
How close is the act of the employee, to the require acts of the job description
SN: Frolic/Detour
Frolic:
a gross deviation/ substantial deviation that will break off liability to the employer (no VL) or if an abandonment of employment
Detour:
slight deviation but will maintain VL
Dual Purpose:
may be considered within the scope of employment because employee’s status had more authority or grounds to do multiple task
O’Shea Factors:
- Employee’s intent
- Nature, time, and place of deviation
- Time consumed in the deviation
- Work in which employee was hired
- Incidental acts reasonably expected by the employer
- and the freedom allowed the employee in performing his job responsibilities
SN: Coming/ Going Rule:
unless there is a dangerous condition; employer is generally not responsible for employee going or coming from work
SN: Foreseeability:
Modern trend: foreseeable danger that the employer should have seen in the workplace
If Employer/ Independent Contractor: Issue
Issue: whether party is employee or independent contractor
Factors help determine employee or independent contractor
- How much control does the employer have over the details of the work
- Is the actor engaged in a distinct occupation or business
- Does the employer supervise
- Who supplies the tools and place of work
- How long is the person employed
- Are they paid by the hour or to do a particular job until complete
- How do the parties understand the relationship
Independent Contractor Exceptions:
- Non-delegable duty: Restatement 423/424
- Employer Negligence
- Inherently dangerous activities
- Illegal Activities
SN: Restatement 423:
One who carries an activity, which threatens a grave risk of serious bodily harm or death unless the instrumentalities used are carefully maintained and hires the contractor to maintain such instrumentality is liable
SN: Restatement 424:
One who by statue or administrative regulations is under a duty to provide specified safeguards ore precautions for the safety of others is subject to liability to the others for whose protection the duty is imposed for harm caused by failure of a contractor employed by him to provide such safeguards or precautions
Joint Enterprise:
Issue: whether if both parties are liable under joint enterprise
Joint Enterprise elements:
- Contract Agreement (express or implied)
- Common purpose or goal
- Collectively pecuniary interest in the venue
- Roughly equal right of control of enterprise
Bailment:
a legal relationship where physical possession of personal property is transferred from one person (bailor) to another person (bailee) who subsequently hold possession of the property
Bailment Scenarios:
- If bailor is negligent = primary negligence
- If bailor is not negligent and owner not present = no VL unless family doctrine applies
- If bailor is not negligent but owner is present = VL
Policy Justification
- Exercise of control
- Risk Spreading
- Internalizing the social cause of activities
Exercise of control:
- If serious penalty, it is assumed that rational employers will take steps to ensure employees avoid injuring 3rd parties
- Rational employers may choose to rely on independent contractors for risky operation and process