Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, can employer Montgomery Enterprises be liable if employee Sean Fleming got into an accident with plaintiff Emily Robinson, after leaving work to go to Cookie Haven to satisfy his hunger, during an on-the-clock fifteen minute break from his duties as cashier, which do not require him to drive, and Montgomery Enterprises provided an on-site break room with a fridge but without food?
BRIEF ANSWER
Yes, under the doctrine of respondeat superior, defendant Montgomery Enterprises will be liable for damages caused by their employee, defendant Sean Fleming to plaintiff Emily Robinson. Under respondeat superior, an employer is liable for any tortious act of an employee that falls within the scope of his employment. …show more content…
Id. at 893. Scope of employment is determined by foreseeability, or whether or not the tort committed is an unavoidable cost of the employer’s business. Id. at 893. To further clarify, foreseeability means an employee’s actions are predictable enough that it is fair to include the loss as part of the employer’s business. Id. at 893. Additionally, an employee’s action that is a minor deviation from an employer’s business is deemed foreseeable and remains within the scope of employment. Id. at 894. A minor deviation includes any personal activities that are deemed necessary to the comfort, convenience, health, and employee’s well being. Id. at 894.
An employee is taken outside the scope of employment when his action’s are substantial departures and unforeseeable. Le Elder v. Rice, 26 Cal. Rptr. 2d 749, 750 (Ct. App. 1994). If an employee substantially deviates from his duties for purely personal reasons, then it is unjust to hold the employer liable. Id. Therefore, the court must decide if the injury producing activity was a substantial, personal deviation or within the scope of employment.