Vicarious Liability in Maryland: Employer Liability For Employee Actions

Employer liability is essential for businesses operating in Maryland, as it directly influences legal stability, financial health, and operational integrity.

Vicarious liability issues can emerge from various employee actions—accidental, negligent, or intentional—especially when these occur within the employee’s job role.

Employers should be familiar with Maryland’s legal policies regarding their responsibilities to prevent costly lawsuits, reputation damage, and potential fines. Our firm’s attorneys have extensive experience guiding employers through Maryland’s liability laws, ensuring compliance and minimizing risks. 

For tailored advice on how these laws could impact your business, our skilled legal team is here to assist you.

Is a Company Liable For an Employee’s Actions in Maryland?

Yes, a company is generally liable for an employee’s actions in Maryland if those actions occur within the scope of the employee’s job duties. Under the principle of vicarious liability, an employer can be held responsible for actions that further the employer’s interests, even if the employer wasn’t directly involved.

Maryland law outlines that vicarious liability applies when an employee’s actions are reasonably connected to their job role. This could include instances of negligence, such as a delivery driver causing an accident while making deliveries, and certain intentional acts if they benefit the company or fall within the employee’s responsibilities.

However, employers typically aren’t liable if the employee acts outside their job scope, such as in personal errands or unauthorized behavior. 

Need Expert Legal Guidance on Maryland Vicarious Liability?

If you’re a Maryland business owner concerned about potential liability for employee actions, our experienced employment lawyers are here to help. Vicarious liability laws can be tricky, and understanding your responsibilities is key to protecting your business from unexpected legal and financial risks.

Our attorneys provide tailored advice to help you manage liability, ensure compliance, and safeguard your company’s interests.

Contact our Rockville employment lawyers today at (240) 403-2619 to schedule an initial consultation.

What is the Vicarious Liability Doctrine? 

The vicarious liability doctrine holds employers legally accountable for their employees’ actions if these actions occur within the scope of employment. This doctrine aims to ensure that parties can seek compensation when harm is caused by an employee acting on behalf of the employer.

For example, if a restaurant employee causes an accident while delivering food, the restaurant could be liable for damages, as the accident occurred during the course of employment.

As an employer, you should understand the scope of this liability, as failing to address or prevent negligent actions within the workplace could result in lawsuits, financial losses, and damage to their reputation.

But that’s where hiring our experienced legal counsel can help confirm as to whether you can be held liable or not for the actions of an employee.

The Concept of Negligence

Negligence refers to a failure to act with the level of care that a reasonable person would exercise in similar circumstances, which results in harm to another. In the context of vicarious liability, if an employee’s negligent actions—such as failing to follow safety protocols—lead to injury, the employer could be held liable.

Maryland law often requires that negligence be proven by demonstrating that the employee’s actions deviated from acceptable standards of care.

For instance, if an employee’s negligence on a construction site leads to injury, Maryland courts could hold the employer liable, especially if the employer did not enforce proper safety measures.

This doctrine emphasizes the responsibility of employers to prevent workplace negligence through comprehensive training and clear safety guidelines.

Factors Influencing Employer Liability 

Several key factors influence whether an employer is truly liable. Below, we outline two of the primary considerations affecting employer liability.

Scope of Employment

In Maryland, for an employer to be held liable under vicarious liability, the employee’s actions must fall within the “scope of employment.” This means the employee is performing duties or tasks related to their job role when the incident occurs.

If an employee is engaged in a “frolic,” which refers to a substantial deviation for personal reasons unrelated to their job, the employer may not be held liable. However, a minor detour—like briefly stopping for coffee while on a delivery route—doesn’t usually exempt the employer from responsibility, as it’s still connected to the work assignment.

For example, if a Washington DC delivery company employee gets into an accident while on a job-related route, the employer could be held responsible. However, if the employee made a substantial deviation for personal reasons, liability may shift away from the employer, depending on the circumstances.

Employer Knowledge and Control

Employers are expected to address any foreseeable risks associated with their duties, especially if an employee’s role involves interaction with the public or operating vehicles. Employers who fail to implement necessary safety protocols or ignore known issues may be seen as more liable if an incident occurs.

For instance, if an employer is aware that an employee has a history of reckless driving but still assigns them to a role that involves driving, this lack of preventive action could increase the employer’s liability.

Taking proactive steps to mitigate risks, like offering training and enforcing strict company policies, can help reduce the likelihood of liability in the event of an employee-caused injury.

For further guidance on the intricacies of your situation, reach out to our Washington DC employment lawyers for expert legal advice.

Case Examples of Employer Liability 

Several key cases shape employer liability in Maryland and offer insights into how courts interpret the doctrine of vicarious liability.

1. Sheets v. Chepko (1990)

In Sheets v. Chepko, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals reviewed a case involving employer liability under the doctrine of respondeat superior. The court considered whether the employee was acting within the scope of employment when they committed a negligent act.

In this case, the court ruled that the employer was not liable because the employee’s actions were outside the typical duties expected of their job role, and the employee had deviated significantly from their assigned tasks.

Key Takeaway: This case emphasizes the “scope of employment” standard. Employers are more likely to avoid liability if the employee’s actions are personal or unrelated to job responsibilities, highlighting the importance of clear job duties and boundaries.

2. Brady v. Ralph Parsons Co. (1985)

In Brady v. Ralph Parsons Co., the Maryland Court of Appeals examined whether an employer could be held liable for an employee’s wrongful act within the employment scope. Here, the employee, while performing a job-related duty, engaged in a negligent act that harmed a third party.

The court held the employer liable, as the employee acted in a role that directly furthered the employer’s business, making it foreseeable that the employee’s actions could impact others.

Key Takeaway: This case reinforces that employers may be liable if an employee is engaged in job-related duties, even if the action was harmful or negligent. Employers must implement and enforce clear safety protocols to mitigate risks associated with their employees’ actions.

3. Tall v. Board of School Commissioners of Baltimore City (2016)

The case of Tall v. Board of School Commissioners of Baltimore City involved a school district being sued for alleged misconduct by an employee.

The court found that the school district could not be held liable because the employee’s actions were outside the boundaries of their official job duties and involved intentional misconduct unrelated to job functions.

Key Takeaway: Employers are typically not held liable for employees’ intentional misconduct when it falls outside their employment duties. This case highlights the importance of establishing job-specific conduct policies and providing training to ensure employees understand the boundaries of acceptable behavior.

4. Henley v. Prince George’s County (1993)

In Henley v. Prince George’s County, the Maryland Court of Appeals assessed a case where an off-duty police officer caused harm while acting outside the scope of official duties. The court ruled that the county was not liable, as the actions were not connected to the responsibilities of the officer’s role.

Key Takeaway: Employers are generally protected from liability when employees act outside of their job scope or while off duty. This case illustrates that liability hinges on whether an employee’s actions further the employer’s interests or occur within the assigned duties.

Best Practices for Employers 

Implementing these best practices can help employees understand their responsibilities and align their actions with the company’s legal and ethical standards:

  • Regular Employee Training and Policy Communication: Conduct ongoing training sessions to ensure employees understand workplace expectations, safety protocols, and job responsibilities. Emphasize role limits to prevent actions beyond their scope, and use policy acknowledgment forms signed by employees for documentation.
  • Thorough Background Checks During Hiring: Screen candidates for past criminal history, verify references, and ensure they have the necessary certifications or licenses. A strong hiring process helps employers select reliable individuals, reducing risks.
  • Establish a Culture of Safety and Accountability: Encourage employees to report safety hazards or unethical behavior without fear of retaliation. Implement clear safety protocols, provide necessary protective gear, and hold employees accountable for policy adherence to foster responsibility.
  • Document Incidents and Responses: Keep records of incidents, disciplinary actions, and policy violations. This documentation demonstrates a proactive approach and can support an employer’s defense if legal issues arise.
  • Conduct Regular Performance Reviews and Feedback Sessions: Use performance reviews to address any emerging issues with employees, providing constructive feedback and reinforcing adherence to company standards. This allows employers to identify and address potential liability risks early on.
  • Seek Legal Guidance for Tailored Best Practices: Consult with our legal experts at Flood Law LLC to create effective policies, training, and risk management strategies tailored to Maryland’s legal requirements. Legal support from our team ensures that your business claims remain compliant and protected from liability concerns.

Contact our Employment Lawyer at Flood Law in Maryland

With proactive measures—like thorough training, clear policies, and a culture of responsibility—businesses can reduce their liability risks significantly.

At Flood Law LLC, we understand that managing these aspects effectively can be difficult. Our attorneys are here to provide personalized guidance on vicarious liability and suing an employer, helping you ensure compliance and address any questions related to employee actions, personal injury cases, or workplace safety.

Contact our Maryland office today for tailored advice on how vicarious liability might apply to your specific situation.

Schedule a consultation with our experienced attorneys by calling (240) 403-2619

Attorney Advertising

Attorney websites, such as this one, are considered attorney advertising.

No prior result in a case guarantees a future result that is the same. Each case we handle is individual with different facts, and therefore, every case is different. We cannot guarantee any specific result in your case.

Disclaimer and Privacy

Flood Marcavage Law LLC is not a non-profit organization and is not affiliated with any such organization.

Viewing this website does not form an attorney/client relationship between you and the attorneys of Flood Marcavage Law. No attorney/client relationship occurs unless and until you sign an agreement confirming the nature and scope of representation.

This website is for informational purposes only and does not contain legal advice. Please do not act or refrain from acting based on anything you read on this site.

No website is entirely secure, so please be cautious with information provided through the contact form or email. Do not assume confidentiality exists in anything you send through this website or email until an attorney/client relationship is formed through the completion of a representation agreement.