YOU BE THE JUDGE
A school district hired Ho to work Tuesdays and Thursdays as an hourly classroom tutor. Her supervisor, Colleen Spafford, informed Ho that under new state legislation, she must be fingerprinted to continue working with students in the classroom. Spafford did not tell Ho when or where to do this. Spafford simply gave Ho a telephone number to make arrangements for fingerprinting. Spafford hoped that Ho would fulfill this state mandate, but she never checked to see whether Ho complied.
Eight days after Ho began working, she drove her car from the Cal Poly campus, where she was enrolled as a student, to San Luis High School to be fingerprinted. Ho intended to go directly home afterwards. She had no plans to work or speak with Spafford that day. As Ho drove away after being fingerprinted, she struck Tognazzini's motorcycle, injuring him.
Tognazzini sued the District on the theory of "respondeat superior" because he believed Ho was acting within the scope of her employment at the time of the accident.
Was Ho working at the time of the accident, thereby making her employer also liable for Tognazzini's injuries?
This Page Sponsored By
Roger Lampkin of BakersfieldDivorce.com is proud welcome
Certified Family Law Specialist Roger Grass
to our legal team!
Copyright © 2000, Law Offices of George A. Boyle