Discuss Respondeat Superior including the following components:
- Introduction that includes the thesis statement (Content criteria #1)
- Describe the meaning of the legal doctrine, Respondeat Superior. (Content criteria #2)
- Provide at least two examples of cases where the doctrine was
applied and analyze whether or not the doctrine was applied fairly to
each of the examples. (content criteria #3) - Conclusion (included in #1)
Your paper must be three to five double-spaced pages (excluding title
and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style. Utilize a minimum of three scholarly
and/or peer-reviewed sources that were published within the last five
years. All sources must be documented in APA style,
Expert Solution Preview
Introduction:
Respondeat Superior is a legal principle that holds an employer liable for the negligent acts or omissions committed by an employee in the scope of their employment. In this paper, we will discuss the meaning of Respondeat Superior, provide examples of cases where this doctrine was applied and analyze whether or not the doctrine was applied fairly to each of the examples.
Meaning of the Legal Doctrine Respondeat Superior:
Respondeat Superior is a Latin phrase that means “let the master answer”. This doctrine holds an employer vicariously liable for the actions of their employees, performed within the scope of their employment. This legal principle is based on the idea that employers have the power and control over their employees and it is their responsibility to ensure that their employees do not cause harm to others while performing their job duties.
Examples of Cases where the Doctrine was Applied:
Example 1: A doctor employed by a hospital performs surgery on a patient. During the surgery, the doctor negligently leaves a surgical instrument inside the patient’s body. As a result, the patient suffers from infections and other complications. The patient files a lawsuit against the hospital for medical malpractice under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior.
Analysis: In this case, the hospital could be held liable under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior as the doctor was performing his job duties as a hospital employee while carrying out the surgery. The hospital could argue that the doctor was an independent contractor, but the hospital had control over the surgery and its outcome, which would make them liable for any harm caused to the patient.
Example 2: A delivery driver for a pizza store is on his way to deliver a pizza to a customer. The driver is driving recklessly, crashes into another vehicle, and injures the occupants of the other car. The occupants of the other vehicle sue the pizza store for negligence under the doctrine of Respondeat Superior.
Analysis: In this case, the pizza store could be held liable if it can be proven that the delivery driver was acting within the scope of his employment. However, the pizza store could argue that the driver was not acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident, as he was driving recklessly and not following the rules set out by the store.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, Respondeat Superior is a legal principle that holds an employer vicariously liable for the actions of their employees within the scope of their employment. The doctrine has been applied in many different cases, and the outcome of these cases depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. Respondeat Superior is an important legal principle that holds employers accountable for the actions of their employees and ensures that victims of negligent acts or omissions can seek compensation for the harm caused to them.
