Employer Relationships: Independent Contractors and Agents versus Employees

  A suspected thief can sue for injuries he sustains during the process of stealing when the owner of the property or employee uses excessive force against them. While a person is allowed by the law to defend themselves, reasonable force should be used. Using too much force can mean that a person will have to defend themselves in court.  The injuries sustained by Sandy resulted from illegal acts of attempting to free arrest. In this case, she may not sue since Sofia did not use unreasonable force while trying to arrest her.  In the case of Graham V. Connor, Supreme Court 1989, it was the force used should be judged from the view point of a reasonable officer on the crime scene (Samaha, 2014). Sandy would only be able to sue if Sofia used excessive or unreasonable force while trying to arrest her.

Sofia is not working in her scope of employment. The Scope of Employment includes conduct relating to what the employee is employed to carry out and which occurs largely within space and time that has been authorized (MANN, 2018). In this case Sofia did not meet the above provisions while arresting Sandy.  The conducted of an employee will be imputed to his or her employer, if the actions of the employee were within the stipulated scope of the employment contract.  As such JC Penny and Sears are not liable. Also, Sofia cannot be considered an apparent employee of the two employers because at the time of incidence his conduct was not on their behalf. She cannot be considered an implied employee since she ceased working for JC penny. In this case, the contractual or agency relationship did not exist at the time. The case could handle outside the court to prevent tainting the image of businesses and avert long and costly litigations.

References

MANN, R. A. (2018). ESSENTIALS OF BUSINESS LAW AND THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT. CINCINNATI, SOUTH-WESTERN. 548-49

Samaha, J. (2014). Criminal Procedure, West. Cengage Learning. 181-82