AEM 320 Week 14

AEM 320 Week 14 - AEM 320-Business Law Lecture Date Monday...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
AEM 320-Business Law Week 14-Nov.26-Nov. 30 Lecture Date : Monday, November 26 th 2007 I. Agency – the authority to bind another contractually. A. Examples of Agency Relationships 1. Employer/Employee-master/servant- the employer is liable for the torts and workers compensation of the employee agent. a. Partners -are agents of the partnership and each other, but are not employees. Each partner is liable for the actions of the other partners. b. Corporate Officers -who are employees of the company and act on its behalf, may be its agents. This will depend on the officer’s position in the company. 2. Independent Contractors- are authorized to perform services for the principal. In general, the principal will not be liable for the actions of independent contractor, but will be in some situations. a. See Jaeger v. Western Rivers Fly Fisher, text at 335. Principal is an outfitter of fishing and adventure trips in the west. Wrongful acts committed by fishing guide. Man who hires Western River for a fishing experience brings suit after being injured as a result of the guide’s actions. Can the injured plaintiff sue someone other than the guide who was the driver of the vehicle? If the fishing guide was hired as an employee, Western River may be held liable, but if guide is considered an independent contractor then Western River is not liable. Court reverses summary judgment and remands case to lower court for a jury decision. b. See Pusey v. Bator – Owner of property is concerned about security issues, so he hires a security company. The security company has guards who patrol the property. The agreement didn’t state whether the guards should be armed, but the owner of the property knew that at least some of the guards carried arms. One of the guards who is armed but is not authorized by the security company to be armed shoots a person on the property (who turns out not to be an intruder after all). Family of the victim sues the owner of the property. Owner of the property claims that there is no liability because the guard was an independent contractor, not an employee. But the court finds that the property owner is liable because of an important exception to the general rule: when you hire a contractor to carry out inherently dangerous activities, you cannot delegate the responsibility to keep your premises safe for third parties. B. Employees v. Independent Contractors 1. Issues to consider: a. The degree of direction and control exercised over the individual by the principal, and also the financial relationship.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
AEM 320-Business Law Week 14-Nov.26-Nov. 30 The more control, the more likely the agent is an employee and not an independent contractor. b.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/20/2008 for the course AEM 3200 taught by Professor Grossman,d. during the Fall '07 term at Cornell.

Page1 / 8

AEM 320 Week 14 - AEM 320-Business Law Lecture Date Monday...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online