The principle of respondeat superior holds an employer or principal liable for the wrongful acts of an employee or agent if they occur within the scope of employment. Agency law establishes the relationship where one person (the agent) acts on behalf of another (the principal), and this relationship forms the basis for respondeat superior. Key factors in both are the employer's right to control the agent's conduct and whether the act was performed while the agent was acting within the scope of their job.
Agency law principles
Principal-Agent Relationship: Agency law governs the relationship where an agent is authorized to act for a principal.
Authority: This can be express (explicitly granted), apparent (created by the principal's actions to a third party), or created through ratification (principal affirms an unauthorized act).
Control: A key element in determining if an agent is an employee (as opposed to an independent contractor) is the principal's right to control the "time, place, and method" of the work.
Respondeat superior principles
"Let the master answer": This Latin phrase translates to the doctrine that an employer is responsible for the actions of their employees.
Liability: The employer is liable for the employee's torts (wrongful acts) that happen within the scope of employment.
Scope of Employment: This is a crucial factor, and it goes beyond just the exact tasks assigned. Courts consider if the act was related to the employee's duties and was performed with the intent to serve the employer.
"Deep Pockets" Theory: A foundational reason for this doctrine is that businesses should bear the cost of their operations, as employees often lack the resources to pay for damages on their own.
How the two are related
Agency law provides the framework for establishing an agent-principal (or employer-employee) relationship, and respondeat superior is the doctrine that provides for the principal's liability within that relationship. For example, if a company's delivery driver negligently causes an accident, agency law establishes that the driver is an agent for the company. Then, the principle of respondeat superior could be applied to hold the company liable for the driver's negligence because it occurred while the driver was on the job.