While making a delivery, Elliott, a delivery driver for Sira's Sandwiches, went through the drive through at a local restaurant to get a cup of coffee and bumped into the car in front of him resulting in some damage to the car's bumper. Which of the following is true regarding the liability of Sira's Sandwiches for the damage to the car?

A) As a matter of law, Sira's Sandwiches is not liable because Elliott was acting on his own behalf.
B) As a matter of law, Sira's Sandwiches is not liable because only property damage is involved.
C) As a matter of law, Sira's Sandwiches is liable because a company is liable for any torts committed by an employee during working hours.
D) Whether or not Sira's Sandwiches is liable depends on whether Elliott's acts are seen as substantial departure from his work.
E) Whether or not Sira's Sandwiches is liable depends on how long Elliott has worked for the company.

Question

corinthian carroll · Accepted Answer

Final Answer : D, Explanation :  The liability of Sira's Sandwiches hinges on the principle of vicarious liability, which depends on whether the employee's actions were within the scope of employment. Getting coffee could be seen as a minor detour (not a substantial departure) during work, so the company's liability depends on the specifics of the situation, such as whether Elliott's coffee run was considered a part of his work duties or a significant deviation from them.

Definitions

Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

Related questions