An Employee from my paper mill Hotspur steals a shipment of wood pulp to impress you with initiative to secure new resources for free. While returning he hits a pedestrian in a crosswalk injuring this person. Is the pedestrian able to sue the company for the recovery of the injuries?
The pedestrian decides to sue the company for the recovery of her injuries is this possible? In all company’s the employers are responsible and liable for an employee when anything happens if anything wrong happens when they are doing something that is involved with the company. That liability’s fall under the doctrine of respondent superior. The definition of the doctrine of repondeat superior is A common-law doctrine that makes an employer liable for the actions of an employee when the actions take place within the scope of employment. There are three considerations to consider seeing if there is a relationship between the employer and employee to see if they were liable for doing an act within comoany time. These are as the following questions. 1. Was the act committed within the time and space limits of the agency? Yes it was even though the employee was preforming an illegal act in the first place, it still took place on company time and was preforming company duties. 2. Was the offense incidental to, or of the same general nature as the responsibilities the agent is authorized to perform? Yes I would say that the employee was preforming a job that would be a normal job function. 3. Was the agent motivated to any degree to benefit the principal by committing the act? Yes. The employee was trying to use the wood pulp to ti impress their employer on how to find new resources for free.
In this case the employee was not preforming a job that the company would not normally do but was doing a normal act. The company has to calm the liability because the employee thought stealing the wood pulp was necessary to do in order to impress their employer. So in conclusion...