The Legal Framework

When a customer seeks to hold an employee individually liable, it is usually under a theory that the employee acted outside the course and scope of their employment, or that the employee acted with an independent intent to harm the plaintiff separately from the employer. This presents a different scenario than holding the employer company liable in the first instance. The legal principles that surround when the plaintiff can and cannot sue the individual employee rather than or in addition to the company all have to do with concepts of vicarious liability and respondeat superior.
Under the doctrine of vicarious liability, an employer can be held responsible for harm caused by the wrongful acts of its employees. The wrongful actions of the employee are imputed to the employer. A key legal concept underlying vicarious liability is that although the employer did nothing inherently "wrong," it is responsible to its customers for the manner in which it conducted its business . An employer may be relieved of vicarious liability to the extent that its employee acts outside the course and scope of employment, which means in effect that the employer was not in charge of what its employee was doing. There is no liability for the employer where the employee is completely on a frolic and detour unrelated to his or her job duties. An essential element of vicarious liability is the employee’s relationship to the employer. Factors to consider include: Respondeat superior is simply a legal term referring to the employer’s responsibility for injuries and damages that its employee wrongfully causes. The policy and logic behind vicarious liability is that the employer is in a more effective position to protect customers and third parties from the misconduct of its employees. In most cases, vicarious liability does not extend to agents and independent contractors who are not employees of the company.