Prugue v. Monley

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming summary judgment where defendant had “no reason to believe [employee] was unfit.”
• affirming summary judgment in favor of employer on vicarious liability claim where “the facts simply do not indicate that [the activity in question] was within the scope of [the employee’s] employment” and the employee’s behavior benefitted only himself
• finding no liability under § 324A where bar owner adopted employee alcohol policy to minimize litigation and no evidence suggested that bar adopted policy to protect third parties from injuries inflicted by its intoxicated employees
• employment manual’s prohibition of drinking on duty does not constitute employer undertaking to protect third parties from foreseeable risks created by bar manager’s alcohol consumption
• employment manual's prohibition of drinking on duty does not constitute employer undertaking to protect third parties from foreseeable risks created by bar manager's alcohol consumption
• whether a legal duty exists is a question of law subject to unlimited review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).