Does Reed have a cause of action against Gunn for the value of the destroyed antique? Why or why not?

Does Reed have a cause of action against Gunn for the value of the destroyed antique? Why or why not?

Category:
0
0

Helper, a delivery boy for Gunn, delivered two heavy packages of groceries to Reed’s porch. As instructed by Gunn, Helper rang the bell to let Reed know the groceries had arrived. Mrs. Reed came to the door and asked Helper if he would deliver the groceries into the kitchen because the bags were heavy. Helper did so, and upon leaving, he observed Mrs. Reed having difficulty in moving a cabinet in the dining room. He undertook to assist her, but being more interested in watching Mrs. Reed than the cabinet, he failed to observe a small, valuable antique table, which he smashed into with the cabinet and destroyed. Does Reed have a cause of action against Gunn for the value of the destroyed antique? Why or why not?

Answer and ExplanationSolution by a verified expert
Explanation Individual G directed Individual H to take the groceries to the door of Individual R and ring the bell. If anything would have happened to the property of Individual R while exercising...

Explanation

Individual G directed Individual H to take the groceries to the door of Individual R and ring the bell. If anything would have happened to the property of Individual R while exercising this course of employment, only then would Individual G, as the principal, would be held liable. However, in this case, Individual H acted in a courteous way, and the accident took place completely because of Individuals H and R together.  On the other hand, if Individual G instructed Individual H to help Individual R take the groceries inside their house and other activities associated with it, the broken relics would have been a liability of Individual G as well. In that situation, Individual R would have a cause of action against Individual G and would have asked Individual G to pay the value of the broken relic table.

Verified Answer

Individual R does not have a cause of action against Individual G. This is because Individual H acted completely outside the scope of the employment. If Individual G instructed Individual R to help with whatever activities Individual R asked them to do, it is only then that Individual R can have a cause of action against Individual G and can ask for recovery against the broken relics.

Purchase this answer to view it.
Login or register for free to purchase this solution with PayPal or credit cards securely


Get help with your essays and assignments

Order custom essays from top writers and get a professional paper delivered to your email on time.

Do my Paper