Someone that has been the victim of such an incident, and someone that has sought a lawyer’s assistance might hear this phrase: respondent superior. What does it mean, and how does it relate to a truck accident?
Details on the phrase respondent superior
It is Latin for “let superior answer.” It means that the employer should be held responsible for the unintentional actions of an employee. It applies to a situation where someone has been harmed during an accident, if the employee had been engaged in performing an assigned duty.
How does the law designate an action as being part of an employee’s duty?
• Acts carried out during the workday are part of that duty
• Acts carried out at the employee’s workplace deserve to be designated as part of the employee’s duty.
• An action that pleases the employer would qualify for the same designation.
• Acts that the employer expects to be completed come under the heading “part of the employee’s duty.”
• Acts that take place during a confined span of time usually qualify as those that are considered within the range of the employee’s duty.
How do such acts differ from the ones carried out by a driver that is a private contractor?
Private contractors have control over the manner by which their work gets accomplished. Drivers employed by a trucking company do not enjoy that same level of control, as per personal injury lawyer in Bedford. Private contractors have control over the means by which their work gets accomplished.
–A contractor must arrange for the servicing of the transport vehicle.
–A contractor must set aside time for fueling the transport vehicle, and must pay for the fuel.
–A contractor’s route might not be one that was assigned to the driver by an employer. Still, it would need to permit transport of the assigned load within a certain amount of time.
–Some of a contractor’s time might be spent locating a place for parking a commercial truck.
–Contractors’ salaries do not cover any time that must be spent waiting for the arrival of a shipment, one that needs to be loaded onto the contractor’s truck.
Whenever contractors’ actions cause an accident, and manage to injure a motorist, the implications of the phrase respondent superior do not apply. Hence, the injured victim could sue the contractor.
In contrast to that situation, a driver that worked for a trucking company could not be sued, unless he or she had caused an accident during an off-duty period of time. If the driver’s actions had been made in an effort to complete an assignment, then the employer could be held responsible for any harm that the driver’s behavior might have caused to a passing motorist.
