Vicarious Liability In Commercial Vehicle Accidents

When an auto accident happens between a private car and a commercial vehicle, many injured plaintiffs are not aware that they may be able to file suit against not only the commercial driver, but possibly against their employer as well. This is because of a concept known as vicarious liability (also called respondeat superior, or ‘let the master answer’), which can sometimes hold an employer liable for the torts – essentially, the civil law version of a crime – their employees commit. The right attorney can help you determine if it applies in your case.

A Duty To Control One’s Employees

Vicarious liability is a concept that dates back to English common law, and it essentially states that certain people or entities, by virtue of the power they hold, have a duty to control or otherwise guide their underlings. Corporations, or in some cases, individual bosses, have that duty with regard to their employees. Thus, if an employee commits a tort, it is reasonable to hold the company or the boss (or both!) accountable if the evidence supports it.

In addition to standard vicarious liability, sometimes a Florida commercial transport company may be held liable for an accident under what is known as the dangerous instrumentality doctrine. The doctrine holds that the owner of an ‘inherently dangerous’ tool is liable for any injuries or fatalities caused by that tool’s operation. Motor vehicles have been labeled as dangerous instrumentalities since the 1930s, since their use is directly related to an uptick in serious accidents. As a result, a commercial driver and their employer can both be held liable in the event of an accident under this doctrine.

The Scope Of Employment

In order to establish a claim for vicarious liability, the employee must have been acting within the scope of their employment at the time of the crash. Defining the ‘scope of employment’ can be difficult, but three major factors generally point toward an answer: (1) whether the conduct was of the type which the employee was hired to perform; (2) must have occurred within the ‘time and space’ limits of their employment; and (3) must have been motivated at least in part by a ‘desire to further their employer’s business.’ This is true even if the ‘purpose’ is excessive or misguided.

For a commercial driver, there are many situations where these three questions can be answered in the affirmative. Drivers are hired to drive, so if an accident occurs while they are driving, it can generally be assumed that the crash occurred within the scope of the driver’s employment. Once this has been established, a plaintiff then must prove the driver was negligent in order to hold both driver and employer accountable for their injuries.

Contact A Tampa Commercial Vehicle Accident Attorney

If you have been in an accident with a commercial vehicle, it is important that you explore all possible avenues by which you can recover for the harm you have suffered. Vicarious liability may be one of them. A Tampa commercial vehicle accident attorney from the Rinaldo Law Group can help ensure that you have the best chance possible at financial recovery. Call our office today to schedule a free consultation.

Source:

floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/liability-of-the-commercial-driver-negligent-hiring-meets-the-dangerous-instrumentality-doctrine/