Replies

I'm no attorney, but it seems to me there are clearly established legal guidelines for determining when someone is on duty or off duty, driving in the course of their work or out on a jaunt.

Yes - there are volumes and volumes of cases, casebooks, treatises, etc. that address this topic to death. Under the current state of the law across the entire country, there is no room for dispute in this case. The judge is exactly right.

The idea is that a victim should have a fair amount of resources available for recovery. By holding an employer liable for actions of an employee, the law attempts to protect the victim.

If an employee commits an act while working, the employer is liable. The only factual question that needs to be answered is when the employee is doing something not specifically in his job description. Then you have a legal analysis between a "frolic" and a "mere detour." These are the actual legal terms.

If an employee goes out on a drive, goes off his route for a few miles to get a cup of coffee, and hits someone on the way, that's a "mere detour" and the employer is still liable. If the employee decides to skip an hour of work to visit his mother 10 miles off his normal route, that's a "frolic" and the employer is not liable.