Question

In a paragraph or two, please respond to the following in your own words: As your textbook indicates, many states have laws that ascribe liability to principals for the actions of their agents. For example, if an employee commits a tort or a crime, it's possible that the employee's employer can be found liable. Do you think these types of laws are fair? Can you think of an example demonstrating this principle's fairness or unfairness?

Answer 1

Answer:

The liability of the employee’s crime cannot be hold by the employer as the person is responsible for his actions rather than its employer. When person commits a crime he does not inform his employer that he is going to commit any crime and employer does not support him upon being informed from employee so it is not fair to held employer liable for actions of employee at all. Mostly employee commits crime without informing their employer because any employer who get to know the criminal action of employee they would fire him at first moment.

Example: If an X employee of ABC Corporation commit a tort of fraud with any company it is not to be assumed that he is being supported by his employer, but when there is any information about involvement of his employer, law must set inquiry on both. When employee is alone commit crime it’s not fair to hold his employer liable for his action. If an employee commits murder you cannot hold his employer liable for that murder.