InSpitsin v. WGMTransportation, Inc., the court held that?
A. ?an employer can never be vicariously liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior for intentional acts of an employee.
B. ?it would follow the general rule of law that when an act is done in the course of one's employment, the employer will not ordinarily be excused from liability, although the employee abused his authority and thereby inflicted injury upon another.
C. ?Johnson was operating within the scope of Johnson's employment with WGM in attempting to collect the fare from Spitsin; consequently, the trial court erred in finding as a matter of law that Spitsin had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted for vicarious liability against WGM.
D. ?the force employed by Johnson could not fairly be said to have occurred within the scope of Johnson's employment with WGM; consequently, the trial court did not err in finding as a matter of law that Spitsin had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted for vicarious liability against WGM.
Answer: D
You might also like to view...
Ex parte orders, by their very nature, are ________ because the defendant has not had an opportunity to be heard.
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).
Discuss the reasons a trustee may want to abandon a certain article of property in the bankruptcy estate. What steps must the trustee take after he or she decides that certain property in the bankruptcy estate should be declared abandoned?
What will be an ideal response?
Public policy arguments have been used to render all except which of the following provisions unenforceable?
a. Child support b. Waiver of alimony upon divorce c. Child custody d. Apparent promotion of adultery
Under an exclusive listing, an owner still reserves the right to sell the real property and avoid a commission.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)