Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Vicarious liability
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Employees' continued liability and indemnity== A common misconception involves the liability of the employee for tortious acts committed within the scope and authority of their employment. Although the employer is liable under respondeat superior for the employee's conduct, the employee, too, remains jointly liable for the harm caused. As the American Law Institute's [[Restatement of the Law of Agency, Third]] Β§ 7.01 states, {{quote|An agent is subject to liability to a third party harmed by the agent's tortious conduct. Unless an applicable statute provides otherwise, an actor remains subject to liability although the actor acts as an agent or an employee, with actual or apparent authority, or within the scope of employment.}} Every American state follows this same rule.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Peebles|first1=K.A.|title=Negligent hiring and the information age: How state legislatures can save employers from inevitable liability|journal=William & Mary Law Review|date=2011|volume=53|page=1397|url=http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/wmlr53&div=37&id=&page=|access-date=6 September 2017}}</ref> The question of indemnification arises when either solely the employee or solely the employer is sued. If only the employee is sued, then that employee may seek indemnification from the employer if the conduct was within the course and scope of their employment. If only the employer is sued, then the employer can attempt to avoid liability by claiming the employee's conduct was outside of the scope of the employee's authority, but the employer generally cannot sue the employee to recover indemnification for the employee's torts. For an example of a court confirming an employer's right to sue an employee for indemnification, see the case of ''[[Lister v Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co Ltd]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Lister v. the Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co. Ltd.|url=https://archive.org/stream/op1265954-1001/op1265954-1001_djvu.txt|website=Internet Archive|access-date=6 September 2017}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)