Sherman v. Department of Public Safety: Institutional Responsibility for Sexual Assault

Q3 Social Sciences Journal of Tort Law Pub Date : 2023-11-06 DOI:10.1515/jtl-2023-0034
John C. P. Goldberg, Benjamin C. Zipursky
{"title":"<i>Sherman v. Department of Public Safety</i>: Institutional Responsibility for Sexual Assault","authors":"John C. P. Goldberg, Benjamin C. Zipursky","doi":"10.1515/jtl-2023-0034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":39054,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Tort Law","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Tort Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jtl-2023-0034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
谢尔曼诉公共安全部:性侵犯的制度责任
摘要本文探讨了三个重要议题的交集:性侵犯、警察不当行为和雇主对雇员侵权行为的责任。至于最后一点,虽然美国法学家长期以来一直在争论被告上级责任的适当范围,但法院大多坚持关注雇员的行为是否为雇主的利益服务的方法。与现有的替代方法相比,这种基于目的的测试的局限性使得律师、法官和学者必须注意其他不太为人所知的雇主责任基础。在谢尔曼诉公共安全部案中,特拉华州最高法院应用了此类原则的一个特殊版本——“机构协助”原则——要求警察部门对其警官对被捕者的性侵犯负责。通过以深思熟虑和有限制的方式阐明这一原则,最高法院确认了其作为机构法发展的领导者的声誉,同时也提供了一个有用的框架,当雇员利用其基于就业的权力对受害者实施攻击时,可以适用于追究某些雇主的责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Tort Law
Journal of Tort Law Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The Journal of Tort Law aims to be the premier publisher of original articles about tort law. JTL is committed to methodological pluralism. The only peer-reviewed academic journal in the U.S. devoted to tort law, the Journal of Tort Law publishes cutting-edge scholarship in tort theory and jurisprudence from a range of interdisciplinary perspectives: comparative, doctrinal, economic, empirical, historical, philosophical, and policy-oriented. Founded by Jules Coleman (Yale) and some of the world''s most prominent tort scholars from the Harvard, Fordham, NYU, Yale, and University of Haifa law faculties, the journal is the premier source for original articles about tort law and jurisprudence.
期刊最新文献
Situating Tort Law Within a Web of Institutions: Insights for the Age of Artificial Intelligence Against Harm: Keating on the Soul of Tort Law 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 Liking the Intrusion Analysis in In Re Facebook Disentangling Immigration Policy From Tort Claims for Future Lost Wages
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1