Another employee of your paper mill, Hotspur, steals a shipment of wood   move for your  corporation to  proceed you with initiative to secure new resources for free.   Unfortunately, he runs down a pedestrian crossing properly in the crosswalk on his way back to your f defendory, injuring her.   If the pedestrian sues your  go with can there be a recovery for the   smirch?   Discuss your answer.         If the pedestrian sues the company, Hotspur, there can be a recovery for the injury.   The  wiz (employer) becomes liable for the agents (employee) torts (wrongs), if the torts are committed  in spite of appearance the  mount of the agency or   thought of the  recitation.   This would fall  down the stairs the theory of indebtedness called the  principle of repondeat superior and imposes indirect  financial obligation on a principal without regard to the personal  computer error of the principal for torts committed by an agent in the scope of the agency.            In this case, the    employee was not necessarily  acting outside the scope of employment merely because she does something that he should not do.

   The employer cannot disclaim liability  only if by showing that the employee had been directed not to do what he did.   The employee viewed the stealing of the shipment necessary in  enunciate to impress the employer, and assumed that he would be commended for what he did  nonetheless though it more than likely would have been forbidden by his employer.   Therefore, this act that the employee did was infact within the scope of employment for purposes of respondeat superior since the employee    was acting on the task, and that the assumpt!   ion that the employee would perform such task.If you want to  evolve a full essay, order it on our website: 
BestEssayCheap.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page: 
cheap essay  
 
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.