CHAPTER 33: AGENCY LIABILITY AND TERMINATION 7
B11. Mirena serves in a representative capacity for Netanya. Orla is injured through
Mirena’s negligence. Netanya may be liable to Orla if Mirena’s conduct
occurred
a. due to a propensity Netanya was not and could not have been aware of.
b. during normal working hours.
c. in the course and scope of Mirena’s employment.
d. outside the parties’ employment relationship.
B12. Rodney is an employee of Security Services, Inc. In deciding whether Rodney
acts within the scope of his employment when he commits a tort against Tracy,
a court will not consider whether
a. Rodney indicated that he was acting on behalf of Security Services.
b. Security Services authorized the act.
c. Security Services furnished the means by which the injury was inflicted.
d. the act is one commonly performed by employees for their employers.
B13. Garry drives a truck as an employee for Heavy Hauling, Inc. Garry would most
likely be considered acting outside the scope of her employment if he
a. crashed into a car at the airport while off duty.
b. hit a pedestrian in a parking lot during a “working” lunch.
c. ran over an attendant at a gas station while refueling the truck.
d. smashed into a store-front while intoxicated on-duty.
Fact Pattern 33-1B (Questions B14–B15 apply)
Barney hires Clean Air, Inc., to install a new air conditioning system in his Dental
Clinic, LLP. Barney does not have the right to control the details of Clean Air’s
performance.