PERSONAL INJURY | 2026-09-29
Respondeat Superior in California: When an Employer Is Liable for an Employee’s Conduct
Under vicarious liability, a California employer can be responsible for harm an employee causes — if it happened within the scope of employment. The scope question, and the going-and-coming rule, decide these cases.
When an employee injures someone, the injured person often looks not just to the employee but to the employer — which usually has insurance and deeper pockets. California’s doctrine of respondeat superior (a form of vicarious liability) makes an employer liable for torts an employee commits within t
Employers stand behind their employees’ work — legally as well as practically. California’s respondeat superior doctrine can make an employer answer for an employee’s tort, which frequently determines who ultimately pays.
What Respondeat Superior Means
Respondeat superior (“let the superior answer”) is a form of vicarious liability: an employer is liable for torts committed by an employee acting within the scope of employment, regardless of whether the employer was itself negligent. The rationale is that the risks of an enterprise’s activities should be borne by the enterprise that benefits from them and can spread the cost. The doctrine does not require any wrongdoing by the employer — only that the employee’s tortious conduct fell within the scope of employment.
Scope of Employment — the Central Question
California defines scope of employment broadly. Conduct is generally within the scope if it was either required by or incidental to the employee’s duties, or if the employee’s misconduct was reasonably foreseeable in light of the employer’s business — that is, a risk that may fairly be regarded as typical of or broadly incidental to the enterprise. An employee can be within the scope of employment even while doing something careless or unauthorized, so long as it is connected to the work; conversely, a substantial departure for purely personal reasons (a “frolic”) generally falls outside the scope.
The Going-and-Coming Rule — and Its Exceptions
A key limit is the going-and-coming rule: ordinarily, an employee commuting to and from a fixed workplace is not within the scope of employment, so the employer is not liable for an accident during the commute. But important exceptions can restore liability, including:
- the required-vehicle exception (the employer requires or benefits from the employee’s use of a vehicle for work);
- the special-errand exception (the employee is on a special task for the employer during the commute); and
- situations where the commute confers an incidental benefit on the employer beyond merely getting the employee to work.
Whether an exception applies is often decisive in vehicle cases involving employees.
Intentional Torts and Other Limits
Employers can even be liable for some intentional employee torts where the conduct is engendered by or related to the employment (for example, a dispute arising out of the work), but not where the conduct is a purely personal matter unconnected to the job. The line turns on the connection between the conduct and the enterprise. Vicarious liability is also distinct from claims of the employer’s own negligence (such as negligent hiring, supervision, or retention), which are separate theories.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue an employer for an employee’s conduct?
Often yes — under respondeat superior, if the employee was acting within the scope of employment, without proof the employer itself was negligent.
What is the going-and-coming rule?
The rule that an ordinary commute is outside the scope of employment, so the employer is generally not liable for a commuting accident — subject to exceptions like the required-vehicle and special-errand rules.
Is the employer liable for an employee’s intentional acts?
Sometimes — where the conduct is engendered by or related to the employment; not where it is purely personal and unconnected to the work.
Is respondeat superior the same as negligent hiring?
No. Respondeat superior imputes the employee’s tort to the employer; negligent hiring/supervision is a separate claim based on the employer’s own conduct.
Related Personal Injury Guides
Talk to a California Personal Injury Attorney
If an employee caused your injury, an employer may also be liable under respondeat superior — expanding your recovery. Trembach Law Firm evaluates vicarious-liability claims in California. Call (818) 514-7680.
Contact Trembach Law Firm at (818) 514-7680 for a confidential consultation.
Trembach Law Firm | 27001 Agoura Road, Suite 350, Calabasas, CA 91301