Liability for Dave’s Negligence and Intentional Tort .Dave is a driver for Empire Courier Service. Around the company, Dave is known as sort of a hothead. During his previous employment at another company, Dave had been involved in a workplace fistfight with a fellow employee, resulting in criminal charges.

QUESTION

Unit 7 covers agency law and liability to third parties.

Case Analysis

Dave is a driver for Empire Courier Service. Around the company, Dave is known as sort of a hothead. During his previous employment at another company, Dave had been involved in a workplace fistfight with a fellow employee, resulting in criminal charges.

One day, between deliveries and in a company vehicle, Dave decides to get lunch. While leaving the parking lot at Big Burrito Bistro, the favorite lunch spot for most Empire Courier employees, Dave negligently causes a car accident with another vehicle, resulting in injuries to Victor, the driver of the other car. As Dave and Victor are waiting on the side of the road for the police to arrive, Victor comments to Dave, “Oh, you drive for Empire Courier Service. It doesn’t surprise me that Empire hires bad drivers because their service stinks, and their prices are too high!” Dave is so offended that Victor would insult his employer’s professional reputation that he punches Victor in the face, causing Victor to suffer even more injuries. Empire Courier Service does not, as a matter of policy, do criminal background checks on its employees.

Considering the legal principles discussed in Chapter 20, explain who is liable for Dave’s negligence for causing the car accident, and explain who is liable for Dave’s intentional tort for punching Victor. Provide your answers in a case analysis of a minimum of 500 words. Cite any direct quotes or paraphrased material from outside sources. Use APA format.

ANSWER

Liability for Dave’s Negligence and Intentional Tort: A Case Analysis

Introduction

In this case analysis, we will examine the liability for Dave’s actions involving a car accident and subsequent assault. The focus will be on determining who is liable for Dave’s negligence in causing the car accident and who is liable for his intentional tort of punching Victor. We will consider the legal principles surrounding negligence and intentional torts to reach a conclusion.

Liability for Dave’s Negligence in Causing the Car Accident

In the case of the car accident, Dave negligently caused the collision while leaving the parking lot of Big Burrito Bistro. Negligence refers to the failure to exercise reasonable care, resulting in harm or injury to another person. As an employee of Empire Courier Service, Dave was acting within the scope of his employment when the accident occurred, which may make the employer liable under the legal principle of vicarious liability.

Under the doctrine of vicarious liability, employers can be held responsible for the negligent actions of their employees if those actions occur within the scope of their employment. Since Dave was on duty, driving a company vehicle, and had stopped at a lunch spot frequented by Empire Courier employees, his actions can be considered within the scope of his employment. Therefore, Empire Courier Service may be held liable for Dave’s negligence in causing the car accident.

Liability for Dave’s Intentional Tort of Assault

Following the car accident, Victor made derogatory comments about Empire Courier Service, which offended Dave. In response, Dave intentionally punched Victor in the face, causing additional injuries. This action constitutes an intentional tort, specifically assault, which involves the intentional act of causing apprehension of harmful or offensive contact.

In the case of intentional torts, the individual who commits the intentional act is directly liable for their actions. In this case, Dave is solely responsible for his intentional tort of assaulting Victor. Empire Courier Service cannot be held liable for Dave’s intentional tort as it falls outside the scope of his employment and does not relate to his duties or actions on behalf of the company.

Conclusion

In summary, Empire Courier Service may be held liable for Dave’s negligence in causing the car accident under the doctrine of vicarious liability, as he was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the incident. However, Dave himself is solely liable for his intentional tort of assaulting Victor, as it was a deliberate and personal action unrelated to his employment. It is essential for employers to establish policies and guidelines that discourage such behavior and ensure the safety and well-being of both employees and the public.