Bradley v. H.A. Manosh Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that in claim for negligent supervision, evidence of prior convictions for driving while intoxicated and careless driving is relevant to knowledge of employee’s careless behavior when dealing with automobiles which caused plaintiff's harm
• holding garage owner liable for mechanic’s off-duty negligence where owner-employer had control over servant, knew of risk and failed to act
• holding that when “the sum of the victim’s UM payments and her jury award exceeds the monetary damages determined by the jury ..., the UM carrier’s reimbursement from a tortfeasor other than the uninsured motorist is proper so that the victim is not overcompensated”
• establishing employer’s liability for off-duty employee’s negligent conduct while on employer’s premises
• plaintiff need not show that employer knew of specific past acts of negligence on part of employee, only a predisposition to careless behavior with respect to instrumentalities made available to employee by employer
• employer has “duty to act reasonably to control [a] servant’s actions... if the [employer] has knowledge of (1) ability to control, (2) need to control, and (3) opportunity to control that servant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).