Personal Injury Lawyer Alliston Explains Respondent Superior
Let us take up a hypothetical situation as an example to start with. You are injured in a car accident to which several eye witnesses were also present. According you as well as the eye witnesses you were stopped at a traffic signal while the delivery driver, who is the defendant in the case, rear ended you. Furthermore, the police report reports the delivery driver got distracted for a fraction of a second when his mobile phone slipped out of his hand and dropped to the floor. It is even revealed the at-fault driver carries the minimum liability insurance coverage that the state allows. The insurance will definitely fall much short to cover your damages. In this circumstance what is the best course of action for a plaintiff? A leading Personal Injury Lawyer in Alliston suggests the victim or plaintiff should sue the delivery driver as well as his employer separately.
This is a classic example of the concept of respondeat superior of liability. But what does respondeat superior mean? An Injury Lawyer in Alliston with years of experience in handing these cases explains respondeat superior is a Latin term which means “let the master answer”. As far as personal injury cases are concerned, when you want to dwell on this liability theory it is important for you to prove the employee was acting within the course of his (or her) duty or employment during the time the accident occurred. At the same time, it is also important to prove the employee was engaged in conduct to facilitate the business of the employer. However, all these facts have to be established in addition to proving the employee was negligent for the accident to occur.
Because of practical reasons personal injury claimants prefer suing corporate entities more than individuals. A leading Personal Injury Lawyer in Alliston explains this is because businesses carry much greater amounts of insurance coverage. In this context it is relevant mentioning the ‘on the clock’ concept for the employee. Suppose the employee was not “on the clock” at the time of the accident then as a general rule the employer cannot be hold responsible for the accident or its resultant damages. The same holds true if the employee was conducting an “out of scope” duty at the time of the accident that is not defined in his or her job responsibility as defined by the employer, then the latter cannot be held liable in this case by virtue of the concept of respndeat superior.
On the other hand, explains the Injury Lawyer in Alliston, if the company driver was in the middle of a scheduled work shift when the accident occurred, the employer is liable for the accident resulting from the negligence of the employee. For more information visit Our Website
This is a classic example of the concept of respondeat superior of liability. But what does respondeat superior mean? An Injury Lawyer in Alliston with years of experience in handing these cases explains respondeat superior is a Latin term which means “let the master answer”. As far as personal injury cases are concerned, when you want to dwell on this liability theory it is important for you to prove the employee was acting within the course of his (or her) duty or employment during the time the accident occurred. At the same time, it is also important to prove the employee was engaged in conduct to facilitate the business of the employer. However, all these facts have to be established in addition to proving the employee was negligent for the accident to occur.
Because of practical reasons personal injury claimants prefer suing corporate entities more than individuals. A leading Personal Injury Lawyer in Alliston explains this is because businesses carry much greater amounts of insurance coverage. In this context it is relevant mentioning the ‘on the clock’ concept for the employee. Suppose the employee was not “on the clock” at the time of the accident then as a general rule the employer cannot be hold responsible for the accident or its resultant damages. The same holds true if the employee was conducting an “out of scope” duty at the time of the accident that is not defined in his or her job responsibility as defined by the employer, then the latter cannot be held liable in this case by virtue of the concept of respndeat superior.
On the other hand, explains the Injury Lawyer in Alliston, if the company driver was in the middle of a scheduled work shift when the accident occurred, the employer is liable for the accident resulting from the negligence of the employee. For more information visit Our Website