Question

On May 19, 2012, a group of individuals, including Greg Hargus, rented a vessel (boat) from Ferocious and Impetuous, LLC d/b/a One Love Charters ("One Love"). Kyle Coleman captained the boat for One Love. While in Cruz Bay, Coleman saw two passengers throwing beer cans at Hargus. Coleman joined them and threw an empty plastic insulated coffee cup at Hargus, which hit Hargus on the head and allegedly caused him headaches and vision problems. Hargus brought suit against One Love, arguing that it was vicariously liable for Coleman's actions. Assuming Coleman was an agent of One Love, what is likely to be One Love's best defense to Hargus' vicarious liability theory? Explain.

Answer 1

On May 19, 2012 a group of individuals, including Greg Hargus rented a vessel from Ferocious and Impetutous, LLC d/b/a One Love Charters named as One Love. They appointed Kyle Coleman to captain the boat. But while in Cruz Bay, Coleman saw two passengers throwing beer can at Hargus. Coleman joined them and threw an empty plastic insulated coffee cup at Hargus, which hit Hargus on the head and allegedly caused him headaches and vision problems. After the incident HArgus btought suit against One Love, arguing that it was vicariusly liable for Coleman's action. Hargus can make One Love liable vicariusly for the incident as the captain was appointed by the the owners of One Love. This means that Coleman is an agent of One Love. And according to vicarius Liability theory owner can be made responsible for any sort of wrong doing of his agent.

Now One Love may also defend itself from the accusation made by Hargus. The best way they can defend themselves is by inflicting that they haven't instructed Coleman to indulge in such act. Hargus don't have any proof by which he can establiched that Coleman had been instructed by One Love owners to do such work. Hence One Love can deny the full responsibility of the incident and state that Coleman is an adult person and he is fully responsible for what he is doing. Though one Love appointed him s captain of the vessel, but they can't be blamed for any miscrepency made by Coleman. Hafgus don't possess any proof which suggests that Coleman was instructed to do such act by owners of One Love.

Hence in this way and by putting up such argument One Love can defend themselves from such accusation.