Texas Employer Liability for Employee Actions

I was injured by an employee of a company.  Can I sue the employer of that person?

What you are asking seems to be whether an employer can be liable for the acts of his employee.  Under general tort law principles, an employer can be liable for the acts of his employee.  This legal principle is known as the doctrine of respondeat superior (literally, let the master answer).  A plaintiff who files suit in Texas courts may successfully rely on the doctrine of respondeat superior to offensively attack an employer for the plaintiff’s injuries.

To prevail in a claim based on respondeat superior, the plaintiff must prove the existence of several essential facts and circumstances.  First, an agency relationship must exist between the employee and employer.  The agency relationship is a sometimes complicated legal issue, but it basically means that the employee (agent) acts as a representative of the employer (principle).  Second, the employee must have committed the action giving rise to the plaintiff’s claim.  Third, the employee must have been acting in the course and scope of his employment when he committed the tort.  And of course, the act at issue must have been the proximate, or legal, cause of the plaintiff’s injury.

The third element mentioned above, whether the employee was acting in the course and scope of his employment, is a source of much confusion.  If an employee is acting in the course and scope of employment, it means that the employee is essentially doing what he or she is supposed to.  If an employee makes a temporary, minor departure from his duties, (e.g. a deliver driver pulls into a convenience store for a soda), the departure is known as a detour, and respondeat superior still applies.  If, however, the employee significantly diverts from his duties, (e.g. deliver driver drives to another county to a pub), the employee is said to embark on a frolic, and respondeat superior fails.

In addition, when the employee is in fact an independent contractor, respondeat superior always fails.  An independent contractor is distinguished from an employee by the fact that an independent contractor usually supplies his own equipment, often performs highly technical or complicated work, and is usually free from direct supervision and control.  The significance to plaintiffs of respondeat superior is that it’s a tool to allow an injured plaintiff access to the resources of the employer, which resources are often far more vast than the individual employee’s resources, to help make the plaintiff whole again.  In addition, the existence of respondeat superior provides a powerful incentive to adequately vet and supervise their employees.  If you have been injured by an employee of a company, call an experienced personal injury trial litigator now to protect your rights.