Tort Negligence Liability For Principals And Agents In Maricopa
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
A principal can also be held vicariously liable - or indirectly liable - for their agent's tortious conduct. In this context, the agent is not acting with actual authority when committing the tort, so it is not as if the principal itself committed the tort.
Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, a principal is generally liable for acts by a servant within the scope of employment. A principal usually will not be held liable for acts of nonservant agents that cause physical damage, although he will be held liable for nonphysical torts, such as misrepresentation.
The principal is liable on an agent's contract only if the agent was authorized by the principal to make the contract. Such authority is express, implied, or apparent.
Similarly, if the agent or principal loses capacity to enter into an agency relationship, it is suspended or terminated. The agency terminates if its purpose becomes illegal. Even though authority has terminated, whether by action of the parties or operation of law, the principal may still be subject to liability.
This is especially true if the third party is made aware of the agent's authority limitations. In this situation, the third party may still attempt to sue the principal for any damages caused. However, the principal can then turn around and sue the agent to recover any damages caused.
Arizona follows the comparative negligence rule, which means that even if you were partially at fault for the accident, you may still be eligible to recover compensation.
A person is always liable for her own torts, so an agent who commits a tort is liable; if the tort was in the scope of employment the principal is liable too. Unless the principal put the agent up to committing the tort, the agent will have to reimburse the principal.
An agent is not generally liable for contracts made; the principal is liable. But the agent will be liable if he is undisclosed or partially disclosed, if the agent lacks authority or exceeds it, or, of course, if the agent entered into the contract in a personal capacity.
A principal can be held directly liable for their agent's tortious conduct when their agent is acting with actual or true authority on the principal's behalf. Restatement (3d) of the Law of Agency, § 7.03; Court Opinions.
To recover on a negligence claim, the plaintiff must establish the existence of a legal duty on the part of the defendant, a breach of that duty, causation, and damages. United Blood Servs. v. Quintana, 827 P.