Question

Andrew is an employee of Betty Paving Co. He specializes in laying down the sort of interlocking paving bricks that have come to characterize the walkways outside a new Coker Business School in Hartsville, South Carolina. Last month his employer and boss, Betty, directed Andrew to go to the construction site of the new school. Betty explained that "the Tileco workers need a hand putting up a mosaic on the lobby walls. I figured that you would do well at that kind of puzzle-like problem, and agreed to let them borrow you for a while." As Andrew walked away, Betty added, "I know how you are, Andrew; stay out of trouble!"

Andrew went to the new school and began helping Tileco's employees with the mosaic. The mosaic's artist, Maria, had put it together in her studio, numbered each tile as she took it apart, and shipped the disassembled mass to Clio. The artist's imperfect numbering system called on the construction workers to exercise considerable judgment in putting the mosaic back together. Fortunately, Tileco's on-site supervisor, Henry, had once been a mosaic artist himself. Andrew's paving experience proved helpful, too.

As the mosaic took shape under their hands, the workers gradually discerned its theme. A heroic phalanx of business students, fresh diplomas clenched in their raised fists, led a mass of armed workers and peasants. Together, the mob stormed such bourgeois citadels of class oppression as city hall, a factory, and a church. The mosaic's inscription read, "Forward, comrade lawyers, to the revolutionary vanguard!"

One of Tileco's employees, McCarthy, took exception to the mosaic. "What a steaming mass of pinko agitprop!" he opined. Tileco's on-site supervisor, Henry, offered a contrasting view. "Yeah, well you're full to the gills with reactionary dogma!" These two political theorists fell to fisticuffs and a general melee ensued.

Andrew, a burly but kind-hearted fellow, tried to separate the combatants. This, he did all too well, flinging disputants some distance down opposite side of the new school's commodious lobby. Several of the Tileco employees so thrown suffered injury as a direct result of Andrew's efforts.

Henry, angered by Andrew's "help", escorted him back to Betty and recounted the incident. Betty laughed and slapped Andrew on the back saying "I guess you showed them what for, eh? Buzz off, Henry! As far as I'm concerned Andrew acted wholly in the right." Betty later billed Tileco for Andrew's work on the mural, and Tileco paid.

Together, the Tileco employees injured by Andrew's attempt to break up the fight have brought suit against Betty Paving Co.

(Tileco Employees v. Betty Paving Co)

Analyze their claim under the law of agency

BUSINESS LAW SUBJECT

Answer 1

Under the law of agency, agency is used to describe a situation in which the principal, usually the employer, authorizes the employee, called the agent, to deal with a third company on the employer’s behalf. In this case, Betty Paving co is the employer, Andrew the agent and the injured employees of Tileco act as the third party or the plaintiff.

Even if Andrew separated the workers with good intention, his deed did harm and injure the workers. The workers sued both Andrew and Betty Paving Co under the rule of Respondeat supervisor.

In this case, the Betty Paving Co may form a ratification agency relationship with Andrew. Andrew had been asked by Betty not to get into any kind of trouble and Andrew did land himself in trouble. So, the agent went against the principal’s wish but still the principal stands with the agent. This is ratification agency relationship.