No More Worries!

Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay

Paper Formatting

Double or single-spaced
1-inch margin
12 Font Arial or Times New Roman
300 words per page

No Lateness!

Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay

Our Guarantees

Free Unlimited revisions
Guaranteed Privacy
Money Return guarantee
Plagiarism Free Writing

Torts torts

Arlo works as a sales executive for Tough Tractor Implements, LLC, which is a company that sells and services agricultural equipment. His sales territory is restricted to the states of Iowa and Missouri.

One of the benefits of working for Tough Tractor is that the sales executives are given a company car for business travel within their territory. However, one day Arlo decides to use his personal vehicle for driving to and from his meetings. Around 11 AM that day, he finishes a meeting in Burlington, IA, which is located on the Mississippi River, across from Illinois.

Since Arlos next meeting is not until 1 PM in West Burlington, IA, he decides to crossover the bridge into Illinois to eat lunch at Marvs Diner which is only 10 miles away. While at Marvs, he runs into Josef, who is a customer from Fort Madison, IA. The two begin a lengthy conversation about new Tough Tractor products which Josef has an interest in buying.

Around 12:40 PM, Arlo realizes that he needs to leave immediately, or he will be late to his next appointment. He attempts to cut-off the conversation, but Josef has poor hearing and becomes offended. As a result, he starts threatening Arlo who panics. He responds by punching Josef in the nose, breaking it, and knocking Josef out.

Not wanting to be late for his 2 PM meeting, Arlo gets into his personal vehicle and races back into the state of Iowa. Just as he enters into West Burlington, he runs a stop light and collides with a car driven by Ana. She sustains serious injuries, and her car is totaled.

Ana claims that Tough Tractor should be liable for the actions of Arlo, as does Josef.

Identify and describe the potential tort claims in this situation.
Discuss legal arguments that Ana and Josef could use against Tough Tractor. Would the doctrine of respondeat superior apply?
Explain any legal arguments that Tough Tractors could use for its defense to avoid or minimize liability.

Full Answer Section

Negligent Entrustment by Ana against Tough Tractor: Ana could argue that Tough Tractor was negligent in entrusting Arlo with a vehicle if they knew or should have known about his propensity for reckless behavior (unlikely given the information provided).
Most significantly:
- Battery by Arlo against Ana: Arlo's punch against Ana constitutes battery as it was an intentional, harmful, and unwanted touching.
- Negligence by Arlo against Ana: Arlo's actions of driving without due care, including speeding and running a red light, constitute negligence directly causing the accident with Ana.

Legal Arguments for Ana and Josef

Ana:
- Respondeat Superior: Ana can argue that the doctrine of respondeat superior applies, making Tough Tractor liable for Arlo's actions during his work hours. While Arlo's lunch break might be considered a deviation, the key is whether he was still "on the clock" and engaged in some work-related activity when the accident occurred. Since the accident happened while traveling to his next meeting, there's a strong argument for respondeat superior.
- Negligence per se: Ana can argue that Arlo violated traffic laws by running a red light, constituting negligence per se (negligence because of breaking a law).
Josef:
- Battery: Josef can argue that Arlo's punch constitutes battery as it caused him physical harm.

Tough Tractor's Defense Arguments

Respondeat Superior (limited): Tough Tractor can argue that Arlo's actions were outside the scope of his employment. While traveling to a meeting, the lunch break deviation and fight with Josef might be considered a significant departure from his duties.
Comparative Negligence: Tough Tractor can argue that Ana was also negligent if she contributed to the accident by failing to stop at the red light or not reacting in time.
Lack of knowledge about Arlo's violent tendencies: Tough Tractor can argue they had no knowledge or reason to know Arlo was prone to violence, potentially mitigating a negligent entrustment claim by Ana.

Conclusion Ana has the strongest potential claim against Tough Tractor. The doctrine of respondeat superior is likely to apply given the accident occurred during Arlo's work hours while traveling for a work meeting. Josef's claim against Arlo for battery is also strong. The success of Tough Tractor's defenses will depend on the specific details of the case, particularly the nature of Arlo's deviation for lunch and the investigation into his potential violent tendencies.

Sample Answer

Potential Tort Claims in Arlo's Situation

This scenario presents several potential tort claims:

Battery by Arlo against Josef: Arlo may have a claim for battery if he can prove Josef initiated physical contact or threats, causing him to fear imminent harm.
Assault by Josef against Arlo: Josef's threats could potentially constitute assault if they placed Arlo in reasonable apprehension of immediate harm.
Negligence by Arlo against Tough Tractor: Arlo might argue that Tough Tractor's failure to provide a company car for his lunch break forced him to use his personal vehicle, ultimately leading to the accident. This claim is weak as companies generally are not responsible for employee conduct during personal errands.