Law v. Verde Valley Medical Center

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that any liability that the employer may have had for the actions or inactions of its employee “would have been vicarious and not a result of joint or concerted action”
• holding there is no fault to impute to the employer when the suit against the employee has been dismissed with prejudice
• stating that if a claim is dismissed, the “potentially vicariously liable” party is not responsible
• recognizing the principle that in a vicarious liability suit, a judgment for the agent is a judgment for the principal
• holding there is no fault to impute to the employer when the suit against the employee has been dismissed with prejudice
• discussing UCATA and concluding that “UCATA has not changed the law pertaining to vicarious liability”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).