Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 390: Listen and Learn -- Vicarious Liability (Torts)
Life With GDPR: Episode 41-Morrisons at the UK Supreme Court
Life With GDPR: Episode 22- Morrisons’ and vicarious liability
Potential for Vicarious Liability Under the Graves Amendment
On August 1, 2024, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in O’Reggio v. Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities that the definition of “supervisor” set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Vance v. Ball State University to...more
In a win for employers, the Connecticut Supreme Court defines “supervisor” narrowly for purposes of vicarious employer liability under Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act - Under Connecticut’s civil rights law, an...more
When it comes to workplace-related incidents, the question of liability can often be complex and nuanced. One common scenario involves damage to an employee's car while parked in the employer's parking lot. This article...more
N.Y. Labor Law § 241(6) requires owners and contractors to provide reasonable and adequate protection and safety to persons employed at or lawfully frequenting a construction site. If a worker is injured on a construction...more
A “supervisor,” for purposes of a Connecticut state hostile work environment claim, is an employee who is empowered by an employer to take tangible employment actions, the Connecticut Supreme Court recently held in O’Reggio...more
This month in Pettiford v. Branded Management Group, LLC, the Massachusetts Appeals Court took a novel approach to vicarious liability, holding that the failure of a restaurant’s employees to stop the allegedly racist actions...more
On Oct. 2, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released proposed enforcement guidance on harassment in the workplace, and the proposed guidance has been receiving quite a bit of attention. This begs the...more
On December 30, 2022, the Texas Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cameron International Corporation v. Martinez, __ S.W.3d __, 2022 WL __ (Tex. Dec. 30, 2022) (per curiam) (“Cameron”). The opinion addresses vicarious...more
Employee filed action against company vice president for sexual harassment and sexual assault, and against company for vicarious liability for the sexual harassment. Court confirmed that sexual harassment is not an...more
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently released a decision, Incognito v. Skyservice Business Aviation Inc., 2022 ONSC 1795 (“Skyservice”), in which it struck out a Plaintiff’s claim for vicarious liability against her...more
Courts in the United States are split on whether a company’s acknowledgment of vicarious liability for an employee’s negligence, bars a claim of direct negligence against the company. Based on appellate court decisions,...more
In an opinion handed down on April 21, 2022, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed Illinois law and now allows direct and vicarious liability actions against employers. The decision, McQueen v. Green, 2022 IL 126666, now allows...more
A California Court of Appeals affirmed an employer’s Motion for Summary Judgment on that question, finding that the employer was not vicariously liable in a recent opinion. The case involves Clanisha Villegas, who worked for...more
The Bullet Point is a biweekly update of recent, unique, and impactful cases in state and federal courts in the area of commercial litigation. We’re pleased to expand the Bullet Point from its previous coverage of Ohio case...more
A recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held a Texas highway contractor liable for its supervisor’s involvement in a subordinate employee’s violation of workplace safety rules. See...more
In Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Ltd, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales confirmed that an employer was not vicariously liable when a workplace prank carried out by one of its employees injured another person working...more
According to Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute, respondeat superior is “[a] legal doctrine, most commonly used in tort, that holds an employer or principle legally responsible for the wrongful act of an...more
On May 18, 2021, in McBride v. Atlantic Chrysler Jeep, the New Jersey Appellate Division revived a Sales Consultant’s hostile work environment case against a car dealership after the Law Division previously dismissed it in...more
For both good and ill, the COVID-19 pandemic has altered every facet of personal and professional life. For example, many employees have enjoyed unprecedented freedom to work remotely. However, with vaccines becoming more...more
Plaintiffs in employment discrimination lawsuits have tried to sue in New York City because its anti-discrimination laws have been labelled the “most progressive in the nation.”...more
Where an employee of a company commits an intentional act, such as a battery or sexual molestation, the managers of that company are often named as defendants on a theory of “negligent supervision”, “negligent retention” or...more
In its “Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors,” the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) notes, “The standard for employer liability for hostile work environment...more
In a recent case involving multiple issues—Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, constructive discharge, and state law claims among them— the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers South Carolina employers)...more
In lawsuits involving commercial trucking accidents, plaintiffs frequently sue the driver’s employer for vicarious liability (respondeat superior and/or dangerous instrumentality doctrine), as well as for negligent hiring,...more
Welcome to The Franchise Memorandum by Lathrop GPM, formerly known as The GPMemorandum. Since December 1997, The GPMemorandum has been presenting summaries of recent legal developments of interest to franchisors and companies...more