How JustAnswer Works:

  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.

Ask Ellen Your Own Question

Ellen
Ellen, Lawyer
Category: Homework
Satisfied Customers: 36714
Experience:  Lawyer, Accountant and Researcher
9968427
Type Your Homework Question Here...
Ellen is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Security Guns & Ammo, Inc. tells its salespersons not to load

Resolved Question:

Security Guns & Ammo, Inc. tells its salespersons not to load a gun during a sale. Bert, a salesperson, loads a gun during a sale. The gun fires, negligently injuring Kathy, who is in the store. Security is
Answer

not liable, because Bert was not acting within the scope of employment.
not liable, because employers are not responsible for their employees' torts.
liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
liable under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
Submitted: 5 years ago.
Category: Homework
Expert:  Ellen replied 5 years ago.
Thank you for requesting me assistance again

The answer is:
liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior
Ellen and 3 other Homework Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
Chavez is a manager of X Corporation. Another company asks for a recommendation about a former employee of X, Burke, who is now applying for a job. The reference is sent to the new potential employer, where it is received and read by the HR director. It is very negative, and truthful in most respects, but inaccurate to some degree about Burke's attendance record. Burke does not get the job and sues Chavez for the tort of defamation. The likely result of such a lawsuit will be:



Burke will lose since the recommendation was not published to more people at the new potential employer.

Burke will prevail since he has been falsely maligned in part in the reference.

Burke will prevail since Chavez interfered with Burke's livelihood.

Burke will lose since Chavez typically would be protected by a conditional or qualified privilege assuming that that Chavez did not act with malice or bad faith.
Expert:  Ellen replied 5 years ago.
THIS ANSWER IS LOCKED!

You need to spend $3 to view this post. Add Funds to your account and buy credits.
Ellen and 3 other Homework Specialists are ready to help you