Dale Sedam, Kim Sedam, and Bryan Norris, as co-personal representatives of the Estate of David C. Hamblin v. 2JR Pizza Enterprises, LLC doing business as Pizza Hut 013413
61 N.E.3d 1191
Ind. Ct. App.2016Background
- On August 24, 2012, Pizza Hut delivery driver Amanda Parker struck David Hamblin on a scooter; Hamblin subsequently died from his injuries.
- The Estate of Hamblin sued Parker, Pizza Hut (2JR Pizza Enterprises, LLC), and a third motorist, alleging Parker’s negligence and that Pizza Hut negligently hired, trained, supervised, and retained Parker.
- Pizza Hut admitted Parker was acting within the course and scope of her employment at the time of the collision.
- Pizza Hut moved for partial summary judgment asking the court to bar the Estate’s negligent hiring/retention claim on the ground that an employer’s admission of scope limits the plaintiff to respondeat superior liability.
- The trial court granted partial summary judgment for Pizza Hut; the Estate appealed.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding an employer’s admission of scope does not preclude a separate negligent hiring/training/supervision/retention claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an employer’s admission that an employee acted within scope of employment bars a separate negligent hiring/training/supervision/retention claim | Estate: Admission of scope does not preclude an independent negligent-hiring-type tort against the employer | Pizza Hut: Admission of scope means respondeat superior is the proper and exclusive vehicle; negligent-hiring claim is irrelevant and confusing | Reversed: Employer admission of scope does not foreclose a distinct negligent hiring/training/supervision/retention claim; such claims can proceed alongside respondeat superior |
Key Cases Cited
- Broadstreet v. Hall, 168 Ind. 192, 80 N.E. 145 (Ind. 1907) (permitting jury to find both vicarious liability and employer liability for negligently entrusting/employing a servant)
- Tindall v. Enderle, 162 Ind. App. 524, 320 N.E.2d 764 (Ind. Ct. App. 1974) (held negligent-hiring claims generally not available when employer stipulates employee acted within scope of employment)
- Lim v. Interstate System Steel Div., Inc., 435 N.W.2d 830 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989) (adopted view that negligent entrustment/hiring are distinct torts and do not merge with respondeat superior)
- Marquis v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 961 P.2d 1213 (Kan. 1998) (recognized negligent entrustment/hiring as separate causes of action permitting direct employer liability)