Plaintiff, Defendant, Judges Case Study

Wheels for Hire and Sam Spade have a principal – agent relationship where Sam is the employee of Wheels for Hire. Sam, in acting as an agent for Wheels for Hire, has access to the keys of the vehicles owned by Wheels for Hire under the “ignition key access process”, a process that outlines how vehicles may be utilized by the employees for business reasons.

Under this ignition key access process, there is expressed authority by the principal that the agent will utilize the vehicle and act on the principal’s behalf under the principal’s control and consent. When signing out a company vehicle, Sam has a duty of performance, meaning that he must perform within the lawful duties expressed in the agency contract with reasonable care, skill and diligence.

Although Sam was not conducting company business, he was utilizing company property and as such, operating under the authority of the company which makes Wheels for Hire liable for the injuries caused by Sam. At the very least, tort liability may deem both Wheels for Hire and Sam responsible and be found to be jointly and severally liable. Either way, the plaintiff is justified in filing a lawsuit against the dealership, Wheels for Hire.

Plaintiff B

Wheels for Hire is legally responsible for the resulting injuries and damages from the accident involving Sam Spade. This is a direct result of the company having instituted a program, “ignition kiosk access process” (IKAP) and subsequently failing to properly monitor its activity and responsibilities – a direct liability of the company.

Regardless of the reasoning, timing, or circumstance behind Sam Spade’s excursion during his lunch break, the company is still liable for their employees’ conduct and asset use, especially under warranted systems. Sam used a system, IKAP, to check out a company owned vehicle or asset. This, in and of itself, is the company recognizing Sam as an extension of the company, despite possible misinterpretations or misuse of the...