Respondeat Superior
- Submitted by: baburhans
- Views: 511
- Category: Other
- Date Submitted: 01/27/2014 05:31 PM
- Pages: 4
- Report this Essay
Respondeat Superior
MHA622 Health Care Ethics and Law
November 4, 2013
Respondeat Superior
Employers provide numerous benefits to their employees; however the employers are also ultimately responsible for their employee’s actions while in the workplace. This paper will consider the theories and circumstances surrounding the doctrine of respondeat superior and how the employers are vicariously liable for the actions of their employees. The doctrine will be defined and court cases discussed concerning how the doctrine was applied in each case. The cases will be analyzed concerning how the doctrine was applied and who benefited in each case.
The concept of the employer being held responsible for their employees’ actions has created additional liability issues in the workplace. The term “respondeat superior (let the master respond), is a legal doctrine holding employers liable, in certain cases, for the wrongful acts of their employees” (Pozgar, 2012, p. 149). With this doctrine, the employer can be held responsible for the employee’s actions, even though there may be no misconduct on the employer’s part. In order for the employer to be liable there must first be a ‘master-servant’ relationship in play as well as the wrongful act must have been committed within the scope of the employment (Pozgar, 2012, p. 149).
The first case under discussion is the case of Westermann v. Bermisa M.D. (2010). This case involved a young man who went to his physician complaining of chest pains and cough. The defendant doctor prescribed cough syrup and ordered a chest x-ray. The doctor failed to review the results of the x-ray in a timely fashion and therefore did not discover the pneumonia until three days after the initial visit. Calls made to inform the patient were misdialed and unsuccessful. The patient was found unresponsive in his home later that same day and later died in the hospital (McNeill, 2012).
In this case the jury reached a controversial verdict...
MHA622 Health Care Ethics and Law
November 4, 2013
Respondeat Superior
Employers provide numerous benefits to their employees; however the employers are also ultimately responsible for their employee’s actions while in the workplace. This paper will consider the theories and circumstances surrounding the doctrine of respondeat superior and how the employers are vicariously liable for the actions of their employees. The doctrine will be defined and court cases discussed concerning how the doctrine was applied in each case. The cases will be analyzed concerning how the doctrine was applied and who benefited in each case.
The concept of the employer being held responsible for their employees’ actions has created additional liability issues in the workplace. The term “respondeat superior (let the master respond), is a legal doctrine holding employers liable, in certain cases, for the wrongful acts of their employees” (Pozgar, 2012, p. 149). With this doctrine, the employer can be held responsible for the employee’s actions, even though there may be no misconduct on the employer’s part. In order for the employer to be liable there must first be a ‘master-servant’ relationship in play as well as the wrongful act must have been committed within the scope of the employment (Pozgar, 2012, p. 149).
The first case under discussion is the case of Westermann v. Bermisa M.D. (2010). This case involved a young man who went to his physician complaining of chest pains and cough. The defendant doctor prescribed cough syrup and ordered a chest x-ray. The doctor failed to review the results of the x-ray in a timely fashion and therefore did not discover the pneumonia until three days after the initial visit. Calls made to inform the patient were misdialed and unsuccessful. The patient was found unresponsive in his home later that same day and later died in the hospital (McNeill, 2012).
In this case the jury reached a controversial verdict...