Philadelphia Pennsylvania Jury Instruction - 1.9.1 Miscellaneous Issues Respondent Superior

• Category: Federal - Jury Instructions - Adverse Employment Action
• State: Multi-State
• County: Philadelphia
• Control #: US-11CF-1-9-1
• Format: Word; Rich Text

Description

This form contains sample jury instructions, to be used across the United States. These questions are to be used only as a model, and should be altered to more perfectly fit your own cause of action needs. Philadelphia Pennsylvania Jury Instruction — 1.9.1 Miscellaneous Issues Respondent Superior is a legal concept that holds employers responsible for the actions of their employees when performed within the scope of their employment. This instruction covers various aspects and considerations related to respondent superior in the context of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania jury trials. The foremost type of Philadelphia Pennsylvania Jury Instruction — 1.9.1 Miscellaneous Issues Respondent Superior is the identification and establishment of an employer-employee relationship. In cases where an employee causes harm or injury to another person, this instruction helps the jury determine whether the employee was indeed engaged in employment duties at the time of the incident. To establish respondent superior, the instruction instructs the jury to examine the nature of the employment relationship between the defendant (employer) and the responsible employee. It emphasizes that for the employer to be held liable, the employee's actions must have been in furtherance or within the scope of their employment. This means that the conduct in question must have been reasonably related to the tasks the employee was hired to perform. In addition, the instruction may discuss the concept of "going and coming" rule, relating to the commuting time of an employee. It clarifies that an employer generally cannot be held responsible for any harm caused by an employee while commuting to or from work. However, there can be exceptions to this rule, such as when the employee is conducting employer business during his or her commute. Moreover, the instruction may address situations where an employee commits intentional acts or acts with clear malcontent. In such cases, the jury will have to determine whether the employee's actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by serving the employer's interests. If it is found that the actions were in furtherance of the employer's business or directly related to their responsibilities, the principle of respondent superior can still apply. The Philadelphia Pennsylvania Jury Instruction — 1.9.1 Miscellaneous Issues Respondent Superior also enlightens the jury about the concept of detours and frolics. A detour refers to a minor deviation by an employee from their designated work duties, while a frolic refers to a significant deviation. The instruction helps the jury determine whether an employee was on a mere detour, where the employer can be held responsible, or on a frolic, where the employer may be exempt from liability. Overall, this specific jury instruction ensures that the jurors have a comprehensive understanding of respondent superior, and guides them in determining the liability of employers in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, when their employees' actions cause harm or injury. It helps maintain fairness and clarity in the legal process, ensuring that both employers and victims receive just verdicts based on the evidence and circumstances of each case.

Philadelphia Pennsylvania Jury Instruction — 1.9.1 Miscellaneous Issues Respondent Superior is a legal concept that holds employers responsible for the actions of their employees when performed within the scope of their employment. This instruction covers various aspects and considerations related to respondent superior in the context of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania jury trials. The foremost type of Philadelphia Pennsylvania Jury Instruction — 1.9.1 Miscellaneous Issues Respondent Superior is the identification and establishment of an employer-employee relationship. In cases where an employee causes harm or injury to another person, this instruction helps the jury determine whether the employee was indeed engaged in employment duties at the time of the incident. To establish respondent superior, the instruction instructs the jury to examine the nature of the employment relationship between the defendant (employer) and the responsible employee. It emphasizes that for the employer to be held liable, the employee's actions must have been in furtherance or within the scope of their employment. This means that the conduct in question must have been reasonably related to the tasks the employee was hired to perform. In addition, the instruction may discuss the concept of "going and coming" rule, relating to the commuting time of an employee. It clarifies that an employer generally cannot be held responsible for any harm caused by an employee while commuting to or from work. However, there can be exceptions to this rule, such as when the employee is conducting employer business during his or her commute. Moreover, the instruction may address situations where an employee commits intentional acts or acts with clear malcontent. In such cases, the jury will have to determine whether the employee's actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by serving the employer's interests. If it is found that the actions were in furtherance of the employer's business or directly related to their responsibilities, the principle of respondent superior can still apply. The Philadelphia Pennsylvania Jury Instruction — 1.9.1 Miscellaneous Issues Respondent Superior also enlightens the jury about the concept of detours and frolics. A detour refers to a minor deviation by an employee from their designated work duties, while a frolic refers to a significant deviation. The instruction helps the jury determine whether an employee was on a mere detour, where the employer can be held responsible, or on a frolic, where the employer may be exempt from liability. Overall, this specific jury instruction ensures that the jurors have a comprehensive understanding of respondent superior, and guides them in determining the liability of employers in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, when their employees' actions cause harm or injury. It helps maintain fairness and clarity in the legal process, ensuring that both employers and victims receive just verdicts based on the evidence and circumstances of each case.