What is “respondeat superior”? In personal injury and similar torts cases, “respondeat superior” is a rule of law stating that the employer of a negligent defendant is also responsible for the defendant’s actions. The phrase “respondeat superior” means “let the master answer,” and the rule of respondeat superior is also known as the “master-servant” rule. Respondeat superior is a type of vicarious liability, which allows a third party to be held liable for a defendant’s negligence in some cases, even if the third party wasn’t there when the injury occurred and did not cause the injury or make it worse. Read more Causes of Action What are nuisance “per se” and nuisance “per accidens”? What is “actual malice” in defamation law? What is “conversion”? What is “defamation”? What is “necessity”? What is “negligence per se”? What is “negligence”? What is “nuisance”? What is “respondeat superior”? What is “standing”? What is “tortious interference”? What is “workers compensation”? What is "causation"? What is "cause in fact"? What is "proximate cause"? What is a “conflict of interest”? What is a “dram shop action”? What is a “mass tort”? What is a "tort"? What is an "intervening or superseding cause"? What is conspiracy? What is false imprisonment? What is the law of “agency”? What is “personal injury law”? View all legal library categories Respondeat superior does not apply in every case. To hold an employer to be liable for an employee’s negligence or bad actions, the injured plaintiff must prove all of the following: The injury occurred while the defendant was actually working for the employer; The injury was caused by something the defendant would ordinarily do while working for the employer; and The employer benefited in some way from whatever the defendant was doing that caused the injury, even if the benefit was very small or indirect. Proving that the defendant was “actually working” for his employer when he injured the plaintiff can be complicated. The defendant must be an employee of the employer, meaning that the employer can tell the defendant when to work, where to work, what to work on, and for how long. In most cases, respondeat superior will not apply to independent contractors, because someone who hires an independent contractor usually does not have the power to tell the contractor when, where, how, or how long to work. Once the injured plaintiff demonstrates that an employer/employee relationship exists between the defendant and the employer, the plaintiff must also show that the defendant caused her injuries while doing something he would ordinarily do under the employer’s direction and guidance and that benefits the employer. If the defendant injured the plaintiff while doing something that wasn’t part of his ordinary work, respondeat superior may not apply to the employer, even if the defendant was on the clock when the injury occurred. For instance, suppose that the defendant is a delivery driver for Acme Build-It-Yourself Model Pizza Kits, Inc. The defendant is making his rounds one day when he runs a red light and hits the plaintiff, who is crossing the street. The injured plaintiff sues both the driver and Acme Build-It-Yourself Model Pizza Kits, Inc., claiming that because the driver was doing his usual rounds as part of his usual employment, the rule of respondeat superior should apply. If the defendant was sticking to his route, the plaintiff may be able to use the respondeat superior rule to sue both the defendant and his employer. However, if the defendant was goofing off on his shift and driving through a neighborhood he would ordinarily never drive through for work, respondeat superior may not apply, since an employer is usually not responsible for injuries employees cause while they’re goofing off, even if they’re supposed to be working. In addition, Acme may argue that running red lights is not part of its delivery driver’s job and that, therefore, respondeat superior should not be used to hold it responsible for an injury its driver caused when he ran a red light. In order for an employer to be held liable under respondeat superior, the employee also has to be found liable in court. For instance, if the case described above goes to trial, the jury must find that the delivery driver was negligent before it can also find that Acme was negligent. If the delivery driver was not liable for the plaintiff’s injuries, then his employer cannot be held liable either, because the employer cannot be held responsible for bad behavior that never occurred in the first place.
Posted on: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 04:13:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015