About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations July 2015 through February 2016 [1] (2015-2016)

handle is hein.ali/resndacy0125 and id is 1 raw text is: 





                                      AGENCY 2D





  Generally

  E.D.La.2014. Cit. generally in case cit. in ftn. In criminal proceedings against defendants who pled
  guilty to conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute heroin, this court denied in part the
  government's motion to vacate defendants' plea agreements, holding, among other things, that
  representations by counsel for defendants-to the effect that defendants intended to breach the plea
  agreements by refusing to cooperate-could not be imputed to defendants under common-law agency
  principles. In making its decision, the court noted that the Fifth Circuit had recognized the Restatement
  Second of Agency as an accurate reflection of the common law of agency. U.S. v. Guyton, 37 F.Supp.3d
  840, 854.

  D.V.I.2014. Cit. generally in ftn. In workers' defamation action against refinery, this court granted
  summary  judgment to refinery, holding that it was not vicariously liable for its employees' allegedly
  defamatory statements about workers. In making its decision, the court noted that Virgin Islands courts
  had continued to rely on the Restatement Second of Agency, even after the promulgation of the
  Restatement Third of Agency, that the Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands had held that Virgin Islands
  courts were not bound by changes to the Restatements; and, in any event, the court's conclusions
  reached in reliance on the Restatement Second did not differ from those it would have reached if it had
  relied on the Restatement Third. Illaraza v. HOVENSA LLC, 73 F.Supp.3d 588, 607.



                            CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS

                                      TOPIC   1. DEFINITIONS

  § 1. Agency; Principal; Agent

  C.A.11, 2014. Cit. in case quot. in sup. (general cite). Daughter of an elderly cruise-ship passenger who
  fell and hit his head while the ship was in port and died of his injuries about a week later sued cruise
  line, seeking to hold it vicariously liable for the purported negligence of the ship's doctor and nurse who
  treated passenger after his fall. The district court granted defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's
  actual-agency claim under the Barbetta rule, which immunized a shipowner from respondeat superior
  liability whenever a ship's employees rendered negligent medical care to its passengers. Reversing and
  remanding, this court declined to adopt the Barbetta rule and concluded that plaintiff's allegations
  established a plausible agency relationship between defendant and its employees. The court noted that
  the Eleventh Circuit and other jurisdictions generally applied agency principles as set forth in
  Restatement Second of Agency  § 1 to impute liability in maritime tort cases. Franza v. Royal Caribbean
  Cruises, Ltd., 772 F.3d 1225, 1235.






I4LILA I    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 nearly 3,000 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:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most