|
|
|
|
|
by rprasad
5270 days ago
|
|
Also, it's not just the owners; employees acting as agents are typically protected by the corporate veil, That's not true at all. The corporate veil exists solely to protect investors' investment in a corporate entity. It does not extend to any other persons. Employees can and have been held civilly and criminally liable for their negligence. |
|
My understanding of vicarious liability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicarious_liability) is that the corporation is liable for actions of the employee in the course of duties (as an "agent"). I thought that the individual was liable only in the case of negligence outside the scope of employee duties (so if you're a garbage truck driver and also happen to be a burglar, you are personally liable for on-the-side burglaries during your rounds but not necessarily for accidentally crashing into someone's car).
However, I am not an expert and would appreciate clarification.
Edit: I did a bit more research and it turns out I misused the term "corporate veil" which appears to be a term of art (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil) specifically pertaining to shareholder liability and which does not pertain to vicarious employee liability.
Thanks rprasad for pointing out the error. Terminology aside, is the rest of my commentary on vicarious liability accurate?