Smith v. American Express Travel Related Services Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an employer may be liable for acts of its employee if the employee acted under the authority of employer and clear evidence exists that employer approved wrongful conduct
• finding employer 26 27 3 Arizona courts “usually” apply the Restatement “[a]bsent Arizona law to the 1 not liable for sexual misconduct where plaintiff failed to allege knowledge of misconduct
• “According to the doctrine of respondeat superior, ‘an employer is vicariously liable . . . for the behavior of an employee who was acting within the course and scope of his employment.’”
• “In common law tort actions, however, the acts of the employer’s agents generally do not subject the employer to liability unless the elements of the doctrine of respondeat superior are met.”
• “Whether an employee’s tort is within the scope of 14|| employment is generally a question of fact. It is a question of law, however, if the 15 || undisputed facts indicate that the conduct was clearly outside the scope of employment.’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).