In malpractice, a form of vicarious liability whereby an employer is held liable for the wrongful acts of an employee even though the employer’s conduct is without fault. Before liability predicated on respondeat superior may be imposed upon an employer, it is necessary that a master\/servant (i.e., controlling) relationship exist between the employer and employee and that the wrongful act of the employee occur within the scope of his employment. The doctrine of respondeat superior does not absolve the original wrongdoer, the employee, of liability for his wrongful act. Not only may the injured party sue the employee directly, but the employer may seek indemnification from him.<\/p>\n
“Let the master answer.” A legal doctrine which makes an employer liable for the negligent acts of its employees, even though the employer was itself not negligent. Similarly, a principal is liable for the acts of its agent.<\/p>\n
A Latin term meaning \u201cLet the master answer.\u201d The \u201cmaster,\u201d or employer, is held liable for negligent or wrongful acts of the \u201cservant,\u201d or employee, in causing injury or damage during employed activities.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In malpractice, a form of vicarious liability whereby an employer is held liable for the wrongful acts of an employee even though the employer’s conduct is without fault. Before liability predicated on respondeat superior may be imposed upon an employer, it is necessary that a master\/servant (i.e., controlling) relationship exist between the employer and employee […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-81800","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-r"],"yoast_head":"\n