Carter, who had been convicted of violent crimes, was hired as an independent contractor to sell vacuum cleaners door-to-door. He assaulted a customer in her home who sued the vacuum cleaner company. You would expect the Texas high court to hold that company:
A) was liable for negligence in hiring
B) was not liable because employers are not liable for acts of independent contractors
C) was not liable because Carter's actions were in violation of his instructions
D) was not liable because it had no control over Carter's actions when he was selling
E) none of the other choices
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q402: An employer could be held liable for
Q403: Fact Pattern 14-1
Emile owns Emile's Used Car
Q404: Fact Pattern 14-1
Emile owns Emile's Used Car
Q405: Fact Pattern 14-1
Emile owns Emile's Used Car
Q406: Anderson was in Las Vegas for an
Q408: Fact Pattern 14-1
Emile owns Emile's Used Car
Q409: Fact Pattern 14-1
Emile owns Emile's Used Car
Q410: If a person could be expected to
Q411: Fact Pattern 14-1
Emile owns Emile's Used Car
Q412: Fact Pattern 14-1
Emile owns Emile's Used Car
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents