Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The common law concept of respondeat superior has its roots in ancient Rome. [4] At the time, the concept applied to slaves, as that was the meaning of what has been translated as servants, and it applied if the slave could not pay himself for the act. [5]
The common-law tort doctrine of respondeat superior makes employers generally responsible for the torts of their employees. In the absence of this waiver of sovereign immunity, injured parties would generally have been left without an effective remedy. See Brandon v. Holt. [29]
Vicarious liability is a form of a strict, secondary liability that arises under the common law doctrine of agency, respondeat superior, the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate or, in a broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right, ability, or duty to control" the activities of a violator.
The concept of vicarious liability was developed in the Second Circuit as an extension of the common law doctrine of agency – respondeat superior (the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate). Pursuant to this doctrine, courts recognized that employers should be liable for the infringing acts of their employees under ...
Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 105 N.E. 92 (N.Y. 1914), was a decision issued by the New York Court of Appeals in 1914 which established principles of respondeat superior in United States law. [1]
Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), is an opinion given by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court overruled Monroe v. Pape by holding that a local government is a "person" subject to suit under Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code: Civil action for deprivation of rights. [1]
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Respondeat Superior holds an employer legally responsible for the wrongful acts of an employee or agent if such acts occur within the scope of the employment or agency. A court will apply the doctrine regardless of how closely the employer was monitoring the employee. Respondeat Superior applies to employees, but not to independent contractors.