Companies can often be held liable in court when employees cause accidents while “under the scope of employment” — but what does that really mean? In a recent case, a company was sued after an employee on call hit a car while driving drunk. Read the facts and decide: Who won?

The facts:

An employee, driving his own car, struck another vehicle and injured its driver. It turned out the employee was driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.24% — over the legal limit. He was also carrying a company-issued cell phone and pager, because he was on call at the time.

The injured driver sued the employer, claiming it was liable for the accident since the employee was working at the time.

The employer said:

There was no evidence that the employee was responding to a call or doing anything other than personal business at the time of the accident. Since he wasn’t engaged in company business, the company couldn’t be liable.

Who won the case?

Answer: The accident victim.

Why: A jury decided the man was acting in the scope of his employment –  mainly because he was carrying the cell phone and pager. Also, the accident occurred near one of the locations the employee supervised, which was enough evidence for the jury that he was on his way to perform work for the company.

The final verdict: The company had to pay the victim $300,000 in damages.

The lesson: Many companies have gotten in trouble after employees cause accidents while operating company-owned equipment, including cars and cell phones. That’s one reason why establishing and enforcing a safe driving policy is a must for some employers.

Cite: de Jesus Uribe v. Aviles

Tags: accident, cell phone, driving, liability