Question

Edgewater Motels, Inc v Gatzke and Walgreen Company: Gatzke worked as a district manager for Walgreens. He was staying at the Edgewater Motel while he was working in Minnesota “on call 24 hours a day" for Walgreens. A fire occurred in his hotel room from a lit cigarette he dropped into the waste paper basket. The fire caused massive damage and Edgewater sued both Gatzke and Walgreens. Both were found liable for the damages.

Why do you think Walgreens would be responsible for the action of Gatzke. Was he still working when the fire took place? Can you make an argument that Walgreens is not liable?

Answer 1

In this Case the Gatze and Walgreen found liable because the Gatze was working for the walgreen and while he was staying in the motel , he was not out of service because the walgreen company call him for a 24 hours a day service and the company held liable.

Normally a person is not liable for the act done by the other persons, but the doctrine of vicarious liabilty in case of master- servant relatiion was applied here. According to this an act done by the servant during his service or job is considered to be done by the master or company, and both the master and servant are jointly liable for that act.


ARGUEMENT IN FAVOUR OF WALGREEN COMPANY .

• In this case, was Walgreen company really liable under the doctrine of vicarious liability in case of master-servant relationship?
• Was the fire occured in the motel while Gatze working for the company?
By answering the both questions above, we can examine that the walgreen company was really liable for the act of Gatze or not.

Vicarous liability in case of master servant is that, the master will be liable for the act done by a servant on the command if the master. There are mainly two essentials for applying this theory they are: firstly, the act shall be done by the the servant while he is in the service for the master and the second one is that he shall work as per the command of his master.

In this case Gatze was residing in the motel while he was doing a 24 hours a day service for the Walgreen company and the first essential was attracted in his case and we can examine the second essential, that he overcome or not.

The second essential is that the act shall be done according to the command of the master.
In this case ofcourse Gatze was residing in the Motel during the service to the Walgreen company but the act which done by Gatze was not according to the command by the company or his master. Gatze lit, a cigerrate and he dropped in the waste paper basket and that was the cause for the fire. Here it is clear that the act was not done as per the command by his master. In a master-servant vicarious liability master is liable only if the act done by the servant on the command of his master.
In this case Gatze is solely liable for the act of negligence.

PLEASE GIVE AN UP VOTE IF YOU ARE SATISFIED WITH MY ANSWER. THANK YOU!