About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - August 2021)

handle is hein.ali/rethrida0136 and id is 1 raw text is: AGENCY 3D Generally C.A.10, 2020. Cit. generally in cases cit. in ftn. Farm workers sued agricultural employer, alleging, inter alia, that defendant breached an employment agreement entered into between the parties through a labor contractor and violated federal agricultural-labor statutes when labor contractor abruptly terminated plaintiffs' employment. The district court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment. This court reversed in part and remanded, holding that the district court erred in finding that labor contractor's breach of the parties' employment agreement could not be attributed to defendant, because a reasonable jury could find that labor contractor was defendant's agent. The court noted that it looked to federal rather than state common law in determining whether there was a principal-agent relationship between defendant and labor contractor for the purpose of attributing labor contractor's violation of federal law onto defendant, but the two sources of law were effectively identical in this instant case, because they both drew agency principles from the Restatement Second of Agency and the Restatement Third of Agency. Alfaro-Huitron v. Cervantes Agribusiness, 982 F.3d 1242, 1259. D.Or.2020. Cit. generally in case cit. in disc. Victim of sex trafficking sued hotel-chain operator and holding company, alleging that defendants vicariously violated federal sex-trafficking laws, because hotel staff at franchised hotels in which plaintiff was trafficked knew or should have known about the illegal conduct of plaintiff's trafficker. This court granted in part defendants' motion to dismiss, holding, inter alia, that plaintiff failed to allege that defendants had actual or constructive notice that she was being trafficked. The court noted that it looked to federal common law as set forth by the Restatement Third of Agency in determining whether the hotel properties and defendants had a principal-agent relationship such that the properties' actions could be attributed to defendants. A.B. v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc., 484 F.Supp.3d 921, 939. D.C.App.2020. Cit. generally in disc. Restaurant in the District of Columbia sued plumbing company, alleging, inter alia, that defendant was vicariously liable for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, because it entered into a service agreement to authorize an advertisement company to send faxes to persons in Virginia, and advertisement company sent plaintiff an unsolicited fax. The trial court entered judgment for defendant. This court affirmed, holding that defendant was not vicariously liable for the conduct of advertisement company, because the record indicated that advertisement company violated defendant's express instructions to only send the faxes to persons in Virginia. The court explained that it was appropriate to look to the Restatement Third of Agency to define the existence and scope of a principal-agent relationship, because federal common law followed the Restatement in clarifying agency principles for purported violations of federal law. FDS Restaurant, Inc. v. All Plumbing Inc., 241 A.3d 222, 239. Ohio App.2020. Cit. generally in case cit. in disc. Conservator of the estate of patient sued, among others, physician and employer of physician, alleging that employer was vicariously liable for physician's medical malpractice in failing to recognize and treat patient for respiratory issues, resulting in him suffering cardiac arrest and permanent disabilities. The trial court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment. On remand, this court affirmed, holding that plaintiff's claim against employer was COPYRIGHT ©2021 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most