ESSAY: Diaz v. Carcamo Legal Analysis

Resource: Diaz v. Carcamo Legal Analysis Grading Guide

The California Supreme Court ruled that an employer will be liable for injuries sustained by individuals due to the negligent driving of one of its employees, stating the following:

A person injured by someone driving a car in the course of employment may sue not only the driver but that driver’s employer. The employer can be sued on two legal theories based on tort principles: respondeat superior and negligent entrustment.

Respondeat superior, a form of vicarious liability, makes an employer liable, irrespective of fault, for negligent driving by its employee in the scope of employment. The theory of negligent entrustment makes an employer liable for its own negligence in choosing an employee to drive a vehicle.

Write a 700- to 1,050-word paper, written in the third-person voice, that addresses the following:

Explore types of principal-agency relationships and determine what type of relationship exists in this case between the driver, Jose Carcamo, and the company, Sugar Transport of the Northwest, LLC.
What course of action do you recommend with respect to the lawsuit and Carcamo’s employment?
Does Sugar Transport’s Human Resources department have any responsibility for their role in hiring Carcamo? If so, what other employment law issues do you find legally problematic concerning the hiring of Carcamo? Identify them and explain the legal issues and laws that were violated.
Include justification for your responses by citing applicable laws and/or legal cases in your discussion.

Format your paper consistent with APA guidelines, and include headings that appropriately signal topics and keep your document organized.

Use a minimum of three different sources within the paper in addition to the laws and legal cases required above, and provide in-text citations. Any laws and legal cases used in the body of your paper must also be included in the References page

ANSWER

In any employment setting, an employer is on most occasions held accountable for the mistakes or negative actions their employees cause to other people. The case of Diaz v. Carcamo also saw Karen Tagliaferri and Sugar Transport being sued as a result of the traffic accident. In the incident, Tagliaferri had opted to move to the fast lane to give way for Carcamo. As the former was moving back to the second lane, her car’s rear bumper got in contact with the front tire of Carcamo. This caused Tagliaferri’s car to spin and land on Diaz’s car. The cycle of events therefore caused Diaz to sue the two as well as the Sugar Transport Company. This report therefore evaluates the principle-agency relationship, responsibility/ lack of the human resource as well as come up with a possible course of action towards…

The Principle Agency Relationship

As per the case, there seems to exist two principle agency relationship. The first one is employee-agent relationship which according to FindLaw (2017), an employee-agent is under obligation to the principle to behave as demanded. However, there exists independent contractors where a person engages individually but provides specific services to the company. In the case presented herein, there is an employment-agency relationship between Carcamo and the principle since he was transporting goods for the company when the accident occurred. Furthermore, Sugar Transport agrees admits to have been viable for the conduct of Carcamo as per the theory of respondent superior…