15.3k views
4 votes
Eppie hires Franz to do some remodeling work in her office. Eppie does not have the right to control the details of Franz's performance. Refer to Fact Pattern 33-1b. While working, Franz drops a tool on Gibby, Eppie's customer, causing an injury. Eppie is:

a) Liable for Franz's actions
b) Not liable for Franz's actions
c) Partially liable for Franz's actions
d) Liable for Gibby's injury, but not for Franz's actions

User Ajit Singh
by
8.1k points

1 Answer

3 votes

Final answer:

Based on the information that Eppie does not control the details of Franz's work, Eppie would likely not be liable for Franz's actions, as Franz is considered an independent contractor.

Step-by-step explanation:

If Eppie does not have the right to control the details of Franz's performance, then this sounds like a case where Franz is an independent contractor rather than an employee. Generally, an employer (or client in the case of an independent contractor) is not liable for the torts (wrongful acts) committed by an independent contractor in the course of their work. This principle is based on the fact that the employer does not have control over how the contractor performs their tasks. So, in this scenario, Eppie is most likely b) Not liable for Franz's actions. However, it is important to note that there are exceptions to this rule, such as if the work is inherently dangerous or if the employer has been negligent in some other way, but with the facts provided, it appears that Eppie would not be liable.

User Yulanggong
by
8.4k points