1. Strict liability: Liability without proof of fault

2. Vicarious liability Idea: One person (or entity) is legally responsible for the torts of another person, because of the relationship between the two of them. Fault of the “higher up” is NOT required for liability. Most common example: An employer is vicariously liable for the torts of its employees, committed within the scope of employment.

3. Rationales for vicarious liability Reduce accidents Cost-spreading (employer to community) Employer has “control” Employer’s work is being done, so it is fair to make employer pay Employee may not have assets; employer is the “deep pocket” that can provide compensation Losses caused by employees are expenses of the business

4. Vicarious liability Idea: One person (or entity) is legally responsible for the torts of another person, because of the relationship between the two of them. Fault of the “higher up” is NOT required for liability. Most common example: An employer is vicariously liable for the torts of its employees, committed within the scope of employment.

5. Frolic and detour Frolic : Employer is NOT vicariously liable -- it is a substantial departure from the employer’s business, in space and time. Detour : Employer remains vicariously liable -- it is just a brief “side trip” from the employer’s business

6. When employee commits an intentionally wrongful act Question remains whether the employee’s tort was “within the scope of employment” Test most often used is whether there is a “causal nexus” between the job and the tort –Often courts say the test is whether the tort was a “reasonably foreseeable consequence” of the job –Lisa M says the “motivating emotions” behind the tort must be “fairly attributable” to the job

7. Employee or “independent contractor”? If the person who commits the tort is an “independent contractor,” the employer is NOT vicariously liable. But the label alone is not determinative! Where an employer exercises significant control over the details of work, the “independent contractor” may be deemed an employee for vicarious liability purposes

8. The development of common-law strict liability The case of “ultrahazardous” or “abnormally dangerous” activities