Sherman v. Department of Public Safety: Institutional Responsibility for Sexual Assault
-
John C. P. Goldberg
and
Benjamin C. Zipursky
Abstract
This article addresses the intersection of three important topics: sexual assault, police misconduct, and employer liability for employee torts. As to the last of these, while there have long been debates among jurists in the U.S. concerning the proper scope of respondeat superior liability, courts have mostly adhered to an approach that focuses on whether the employee acted for the purpose of serving the employer’s interests. The narrowness of this purpose-based test, as compared to available alternatives, makes it imperative for lawyers, judges, and scholars to be attentive to other, less well-known, bases for employer liability. In Sherman v Department of Public Safety, the Delaware Supreme Court applied a particular version of one such doctrine – the “aided-by-agency” doctrine – to hold a police department accountable for its officer’s sexual assault of an arrestee. By articulating this doctrine in a thoughtful and circumscribed manner, the Court affirmed its reputation as a leader in the development of agency law, while also providing a helpful framework that can be applied to hold certain employers liable when employees take advantage of their employment-based authority over their victims to perpetrate assaults.
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Symposium Articles
- Private Nuisance: The UK Supreme Court Take a View
- Liking the Intrusion Analysis in In Re Facebook
- Analog Analogies: Intel v. Hamidi and the Future of Trespass to Chattels
- What We Talk About When We Talk About the Duty of Care in Negligence Law: The Utah Supreme Court Sets an Example in Boynton v. Kennecott Utah Copper
- Disentangling Immigration Policy From Tort Claims for Future Lost Wages
- Sherman v. Department of Public Safety: Institutional Responsibility for Sexual Assault
- Putting “Duty” Back on Track
- Public Authority Liability for Careless Failure to Protect from Harm
- Unnecessary and Insufficient Factual Causes
- Beltran-Serrano v. City of Tacoma
- Main Article
- The Tort of Discrimination
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Symposium Articles
- Private Nuisance: The UK Supreme Court Take a View
- Liking the Intrusion Analysis in In Re Facebook
- Analog Analogies: Intel v. Hamidi and the Future of Trespass to Chattels
- What We Talk About When We Talk About the Duty of Care in Negligence Law: The Utah Supreme Court Sets an Example in Boynton v. Kennecott Utah Copper
- Disentangling Immigration Policy From Tort Claims for Future Lost Wages
- Sherman v. Department of Public Safety: Institutional Responsibility for Sexual Assault
- Putting “Duty” Back on Track
- Public Authority Liability for Careless Failure to Protect from Harm
- Unnecessary and Insufficient Factual Causes
- Beltran-Serrano v. City of Tacoma
- Main Article
- The Tort of Discrimination
